Uncovering the Impact of the LA Wildfire: Key Estimates Lacking After Trump’s Management Changes

As President Donald Trump took office, the wildfires in Los Angeles were still burning, prompting a return to previous Biden-era directives for federal agencies addressing the climate crisis. Flip

January’s fire conditions, exacerbated by climate change, played a significant role in igniting wildfires in Palisades and Eton. Nearly 40,000 acres were affected. By March, Adam Smith, the chief investigator of the $1 billion weather and climate disaster program at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), was still assessing the severe impact of the LA wildfires when he received informal orders to cease all work-related communications.

Each month, Smith’s team maintained an extensive online database tracking losses from over 400 natural disasters since 1980, all causing more than $1 billion in damages. Following the LA wildfire, Smith reported having received restrictions that prevented him from updating this database and sharing initial findings with the public. The wildfire incurred damages amounting to at least $50 billion.

In early May, Smith resigned due to concerns about the agency’s plans for the future. The billion-dollar weather and climate disaster online database Smith had developed over 15 years at NOAA was subsequently shut down. Days later, NOAA confirmed it would cease updates for this important resource, which provides essential data for scientists, citizens, and insurance firms evaluating climate risk.

A NOAA spokesperson stated that the database would no longer be updated “due to changing priorities and staffing adjustments.” The White House did not provide any comments regarding the matter.

According to Smith, the database’s economic losses are particularly vital, as billion-dollar disasters like hurricanes and widespread wildfires are increasingly common. In 2023, the US set new records for billion-dollar disasters, with the database indicating a staggering $28 billion event. Over the past five years, the US has averaged about $24 billion in disasters annually, a significant rise from just $3 billion average during the 1980s.

“We need to be more prepared than ever,” Smith told NBC News. “Some have access to the data and insights for better preparation. Unfortunately, discontinuing resources like these creates a gap in knowledge.”

Researchers have identified rising global temperatures as a key driver in these changes over recent decades. Long-term droughts and increased wildfire risks are affecting regions across the western United States, where warming atmospheres retain more moisture, resulting in more intense storms and hurricanes.

This increase in extreme weather events presents significant challenges for insurance policyholders in areas susceptible to natural disasters. Rates in hurricane-prone states like Louisiana and Florida have surged, with some homeowners facing nearly $10,000 in annual insurance premiums. In California, major insurance firms, including State Farm, have rescinded policies due to escalating fire risks.

A study from the National Bureau of Economic Research revealed that the heightened risk of disasters would drive up annual insurance costs for households affected by climate issues by an estimated $700 over the next three decades. On a global scale, reports from German insurance giant Munich RE indicated that natural disasters resulted in record insurance losses of $140 billion worldwide in 2024.

“You cannot conceal the costs of climate change from those who are already incurring those costs through their insurance premiums,” stated Carly Fabian, a civic policy advocate from a consumer rights nonprofit. “The insurance and reinsurance sectors are built to withstand a limited number of major multi-billion dollar disasters, but are not equipped for consecutive disasters occurring with such frequency.”

Data compiled in the multibillion-dollar disaster database illustrates the financial toll of hurricanes, severe storms, and wildfires across the nation, serving as a critical resource for private insurers modeling climate risks and establishing rates for homeowners in vulnerable areas. Although insurance companies utilize various datasets for their climate risk assessments, the scale of NOAA’s database remains unmatched.

Jeremy Porter, a climate risk expert at the First Street Foundation, emphasized that the database is one of the most effective tools for illustrating the economic impact of climate-related disasters. First Street utilizes the $1 billion disaster database for its national risk assessment reports.

The NOAA database also serves as an essential resource for homeowners facing rising rates, non-renewals, and cancellations in home insurance.

“We are navigating an industry where insurers have extensive access to private data while the average consumer lacks insight into that data,” remarked the policy director for Americans for Financial Reform, a nonprofit advocating for stricter regulations. “The removal of public data sources exacerbates this imbalance, hindering individuals’ ability to understand their risks and the challenges they face from financial service providers.”

Madison Condon, an environmental law professor at Boston University, highlighted that the cuts to NOAA’s $1 billion disaster database are part of a broader trend involving rollbacks of national climate assessments and data resources, including the annual report detailing the impacts of climate change in the US released in late April. The Trump administration notably rejected numerous scientific contributions to these reports.

Additionally, the Trump administration has eliminated data products related to melting Antarctic glaciers and sea ice cover, marking yet another setback for US Antarctic research. Leaked documents obtained by ProPublica indicated that Trump intended to reduce NOAA funding by 27%, particularly for innovative climate-related initiatives, and proposed nearly 75% cuts to the Bureau of Ocean and Atmospheric Research, responsible for maintaining global climate models essential for insurers’ climate risk assessments.