[HN Gopher] xPrize Wildfire - $11M Prize Competition
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       xPrize Wildfire - $11M Prize Competition
        
       Author : TheBlapse
       Score  : 45 points
       Date   : 2023-04-21 17:29 UTC (5 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.xprize.org)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.xprize.org)
        
       | gcheong wrote:
       | Sponsored in part by PG&E a major cause of wildfires. Seems like
       | a bit of deflection to me.
        
       | mNovak wrote:
       | While a nice thought, the timeline (<18mo for the space-based
       | sensor track) isn't aligned for developing anything truly new or
       | revolutionary, just some quick reaction rehashing of existing
       | tech (read: now with 'AI').
        
       | Steven420 wrote:
       | Not sure that completely stopping wildfires is a good idea as
       | many species of plants depend on fire for seed germination. I
       | think controlled burns may be the way to go instead of preventing
       | wildfires completely
        
         | Etheryte wrote:
         | And the competition is not about completely stopping wildfires,
         | as is clearly stated on the linked page. They target what they
         | call Extreme Wildfire Events which are roughly 3% of all
         | wildfires. The focus is on detecting and suppressing those, as
         | those 3% of all wildfires account for 80% of the total damages.
        
         | exabrial wrote:
         | Controlled burns have been shown to be carbon negative. The
         | destroy invasive species that have not evolved to handle the
         | natural processes native to an area.
         | 
         | Humans are actually the biggest issue, once again. Prescribed
         | burns are healthy for ecosystems and for the planet itself.
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | soperj wrote:
       | Best way to end destructive fires is to light destructive fires.
       | The real purpose of fighting these fires seem to be protecting
       | the logging industry.
        
         | exabrial wrote:
         | The majority of the logging industry is a good thing for the
         | planet. When you log sustainably, you take fixated carbon, turn
         | it into a product that can be used, then allow the area to
         | regrow, fixated more carbon as a building product. The vast
         | majority of the time, it's a win-win.
         | 
         | The negatives are supplying things like cheap paper to the post
         | office for marketing departments to across to spam people using
         | US Postal Mail. _Thats_ what needs to be stopped, as it's just
         | a waste.
        
           | oatmeal1 wrote:
           | > The majority of the logging industry is a good thing for
           | the planet.
           | 
           | Absolutely not. The amount of carbon sequestered is
           | inconsequential relative to the habitat destruction, habitat
           | fragmentation, species going extinct, etc.
        
             | davidbanham wrote:
             | For clear felling in a rainforest, sure. For clear felling
             | in a timber plantation, probably? For selective logging
             | outside particularly sensitive areas, nah.
        
           | soperj wrote:
           | I honestly would be very surprised if they didn't make more
           | CO2 logging and turning that tree into a building product
           | than they sequester. Postal spam is likely even more
           | damaging.
        
             | danielvf wrote:
             | Trees are roughly 50% carbon by weight. Each pound of
             | carbon represents 3.67 pounds of cleaned carbon dioxide.
             | 
             | Each pound of lumber represents 1.8 pounds of carbon
             | dioxide our of the air. It looks like both logging trucks
             | and flatbed timber trucks can carry around 24 tons of
             | lumber, which would be 43 tones of carbon dioxide.
             | 
             | Sawmills are efficient, and would make a negligible
             | contribution to total carbon. Transportation would be the
             | biggest carbon cost. At least on the East Cost US there's a
             | lot of timber growing so distances aren't too far. Let's
             | say 200 miles total from logging to sawmill to use. 400
             | miles round trip. Using average US freight truck emissions
             | that's about 0.07 tons of carbon dioxide released.
             | 
             | So let's round that up a bit and say 43 tons sequestered
             | for for 0.1 tons expended. Seems like a win.
        
               | danielvf wrote:
               | Another way of thinking about this: if you burned 1,600
               | gallons of gasoline to sequester one 3,000 lb pine tree,
               | you'd be net ahead.
               | 
               | Unless I'm really off on my math.
        
               | boplicity wrote:
               | You can't get ahead if you're pulling carbon out of the
               | ground. That's the fundamental problem. Go ahead and burn
               | all of the carbon you want, as long as it's not coming
               | from long-term storage (e.g. fossil fuels), and is rather
               | already part of the carbon cycle (e.g. trees).
        
               | soperj wrote:
               | You haven't sequestered anything by getting it to the
               | sawmill, that's only one portion of the journey. Also
               | Using the Environmental Protection Agency's Greenhouse
               | Gas Equivalency Calculator, one ton of carbon is
               | equivalent to 413 gallons of gasoline, so I think your
               | math is off.
        
         | idiotsecant wrote:
         | There is very little focus on protecting logging and a _lot_ of
         | focus on protecting suburban sprawl. We live further and
         | further into ecosystems that up until recently could have
         | burned with minimal impact to humans. Now those same forests
         | are full of cabin-mansions and summer homes of people who are
         | rich enough for the system to care about them.
        
           | soperj wrote:
           | In my Canadian province (BC) most of the trees (and fires)
           | are where people don't live, it's very much about protecting
           | their #1 export (tied with Coal)
        
         | stonogo wrote:
         | Spoken like someone who hasn't had to spend weeks with off-the-
         | charts smoke-based air quality problems, followed by hundreds
         | of thousands of people having to replace air filters in houses
         | and cars.
        
           | mkoubaa wrote:
           | Why do you get that impression?
        
           | soperj wrote:
           | I live in the pacific northwest... If they light the fires in
           | Spring when it's still wet, you don't get the same magnitude
           | of fire in the summer. It would also help if they didn't
           | spray the areas afterwards with round-up so that Aspen (a
           | fire break species) doesn't grow, so that they can plant
           | round-up ready Pine (a species that promotes fires).
        
       | barathr wrote:
       | Unless I'm misreading this, it doesn't include passive fire
       | mitigation approaches.
       | 
       | For example, for low-frost areas of California -- which is about
       | half the state currently (expanding all the time), we developed
       | models for planting bananas and irrigating with recycled water,
       | producing a profitable crop yield and providing a non-flammable
       | barrier at the wildland-urban interface:
       | 
       | https://raghavan.usc.edu/papers/ediblefirebuffers-biorxiv21....
        
       | JediLuke wrote:
       | [dead]
        
       | tomrod wrote:
       | Fire is healthy for the ecosystem. What if instead of fighting
       | the fires, we hardened our dwellings in some way so that they are
       | mildly annoying instead of community ending?
       | 
       | Buried utilities, thick brick walls, bunker designs, breaker
       | areas around infrastructure, drone tech to identify and, if
       | possible, cull tumbleweeds, etc.
        
       | sam1r wrote:
       | I wonder what format the winners's submission would be. Maybe I'm
       | missing something going through the website.
       | 
       | Would it be similar to that of a white paper? Or an actual demo.
       | Or additional working detection hardware...
       | 
       | Under the past challenges, one mentions re-engineering a covid
       | mask, so the end point is clear.
       | 
       | For this one, it feels much more open ended. Exciting, but I'm
       | also quite curious, if anyone has an idea or examples.
        
       | uoaei wrote:
       | It seems like the prize is not evaluated based on being able to
       | predict wildfire behavior, but specifically on technologies for
       | quashing wildfires as they start. The former makes a lot of
       | sense, while the latter assumes an outdated perspective on
       | wildland management.
       | 
       | Who does this serve?
        
         | stonogo wrote:
         | It serves the people whose houses are burned and the even
         | larger population who has to live in smoke-polluted air for
         | days or weeks at a time. The prize targets _extreme_ wildfire
         | events, as it says explicitly. Not one of the prizes relates to
         | quashing anything, it 's all detection and tracking.
        
           | uoaei wrote:
           | Then someone should probably inform their copywriter that
           | "End Destructive Wildfires" is not an accurate framing of the
           | goals. More like "End Community Destruction By Wildfires"
        
       | devindotcom wrote:
       | The tagline "ending" wildfires is definitely misleading as of
       | course they are a natural occurrence. But climate change has made
       | them increasingly intense and frequent and although this may also
       | be "natural" in a way it is also increasingly irreversibly
       | destructive as the forests are not replacing themselves
       | "naturally" but rather with invasive or otherwise undesirable
       | species.
       | 
       | Xprize stuff is of course somewhat self-serving and this requires
       | real investment to address (I am writing about one such effort in
       | another tab) but better awareness and intelligence is not a bad
       | thing. No one is talking about eliminating controlled burns or
       | other measures, in fact as the environment macro factors shift we
       | need more information to make informed decisions about when and
       | how to do those.
       | 
       | It does serve the logging industry sure, but also major national
       | forests and parks that serve many purposes. Fisheries and fishing
       | companies benefit from watershed restoration and species-based
       | protections but we don't think of it that way. Besides logging is
       | not inherently evil, where do you think all those compostable
       | paper products come from? A better timber industry is needed to
       | support renewables and wildfire mitigation is a part of that
       | evolution.
        
       | giarc wrote:
       | It's not really a competition at putting out wildfires, moreso
       | detecting and tracking them. There are 3 separate prizes, so to
       | speak.
       | 
       | $5M Autonomous Wildfire Response Track
       | 
       | $5M Space-Based Wildfire Detection and Intelligence Track
       | 
       | $1M Lockheed Martin Accurate Detection Intelligence Bonus Prize
        
       | mrandish wrote:
       | On one hand this effort sounds like a good way to generate some
       | interesting concepts. On the other hand, as a long-time resident
       | of a rural, wildfire-prone area, it's also important to educate
       | the public and politicians that there is a large body of proven
       | land management best practices that can already significantly
       | improve prevention, control and mitigation. While we can always
       | do better, we often aren't sufficiently utilizing the tools and
       | techniques we already have.
       | 
       | The issues are more often political, economic and systemic than
       | they are not knowing effective ways to further reduce risks and
       | harm. Things like properly managed controlled burns are under-
       | utilized because they are politically controversial. Enacting and
       | enforcing codes mandating land management around private
       | structures are politically unpopular. Out where I live, the local
       | fire rangers just point-blank tell property owners "If you don't
       | clear out all the brush and downed trees within a couple hundred
       | feet of your structures, we're defending your house _after_ the
       | others that meet code " but no politician is willing to tell
       | voters that. Worse, land owners continue to get permits issued to
       | construct permanent dwellings in isolated locations which are
       | extremely difficult to defend. If they want to build there, I say
       | let them but also issue fair warning if they choose to proceed,
       | they are on their own in the event of fire. Volunteer
       | firefighters shouldn't need to risk their lives to defend houses
       | which should never have been built in inaccessible, indefensible
       | locations.
        
         | hellotomyrars wrote:
         | The access issue is huge and crosses over in to other issues
         | (Inaccessible public land). I didn't do wildland firefighting
         | when I was a volunteer firefighter but the other people around
         | talked about it a lot. There were areas that had to pay more to
         | be served by neighboring agencies.
        
         | idiotsecant wrote:
         | Yep, you don't fight massive fires with whizbang technical
         | novelties. In the context of fires big enough to matter the
         | only tools in your toolbox that are sufficiently scalable are
         | very low tech.
        
           | RandallBrown wrote:
           | > In the context of fires big enough to matter the only tools
           | in your toolbox that are sufficiently scalable are very low
           | tech.
           | 
           | Isn't that the whole point of this X Prize, to improve the
           | tools available?
        
             | ortusdux wrote:
             | The #1 tool in our toolbox is prevention. This is a
             | multipart prize, with $5m going to fire detection, and $5m
             | going to fire response. To me it feels like pushing for
             | research into reducing fevers when the virus is the
             | problem.
             | 
             | The low tech solutions are typically fuel load reduction,
             | fire breaks, controlled burns, and community education. The
             | first two are standard techniques used by the forestry
             | industry, and they funnel a lot more than $11m into R&D.
             | 
             | That being said, new tech for monitoring and controlling
             | controlled burns would be great.
             | 
             | Biden-Harris cut loose almost $200m for wildfire defense a
             | month ago. California got more than half of it, WA got
             | $25m, and OR got $24m. I'm very interested to see the
             | results.
             | 
             | https://www.usda.gov/media/press-
             | releases/2023/03/20/biden-h...
        
         | seltzered_ wrote:
         | Thanks for this comment. When reading the part where the xprize
         | site says "especially in the expanding Wildland-Urban
         | Interface, where homes, businesses, and major infrastructure
         | are most at risk"
         | 
         | It reminded me of the excerpt from the film 'Tending the Wild'
         | about California natives where one argues one needs to learn to
         | 'smell the smoke':
         | https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=42&v=Z-EXQ9be8mE&feature=you...
         | 
         | To me, this is more of a predicament around what our human
         | expectations are and how to appropriately live, especially if
         | populations are desiring to build settlement structures in ways
         | that create wildlife urban interface.
        
         | westurner wrote:
         | Wildfire suppression:
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wildfire_suppression#Tactics
         | 
         | History of wildfire suppression in the United States:
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_wildfire_suppressio...
         | 
         | Controlled burn: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controlled_burn
         | 
         | > _A controlled or prescribed burn, also known as hazard
         | reduction burning, [1] backfire, swailing, or a burn-off, [2]
         | is a fire set intentionally for purposes of forest management,
         | fire suppression, farming, prairie restoration or greenhouse
         | gas abatement. A controlled burn may also refer to the
         | intentional burning of slash and fuels through burn piles. [3]
         | Fire is a natural part of both forest and grassland ecology and
         | controlled fire can be a tool for foresters._
         | 
         | Hydrogel: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogel
         | 
         | Aerogel: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aerogel
         | 
         | Water-based batteries have less fire risk FWIU
         | 
         | "1,000% Difference: Major Storage Capacity in Water-Based
         | Batteries Found" (2023)
         | https://scitechdaily.com/1000-difference-major-storage-capac...
         | 
         | > _The metal-free water-based batteries are unique from those
         | that utilize cobalt in their lithium-ion form. The research
         | group's focus on this type of battery stems from a desire for
         | greater control over the domestic supply chain as cobalt and
         | lithium are commonly sourced from outside the country.
         | Additionally, the batteries' safer chemistry could prevent
         | fires._
        
           | mrandish wrote:
           | That's a good list of useful links. From my experience as a
           | home owner in a high-risk area, I'd add some of the things
           | which can make a big difference are often surprisingly
           | simple. In addition to managing your own land properly, make
           | sure you have a large enough water tank to support
           | firefighters in protecting your land. We got a well tank five
           | times bigger than our typical usage needs. Another key thing
           | is to put your tank next to where a fire truck can access it
           | easily and get the proper adapter installed so the fire truck
           | can direct connect to your tank (it's not included in most).
           | 
           | We also widened the access road on our property to support
           | larger fire trucks and dozers. Obviously, fire-resistant
           | construction materials and techniques are a huge help and not
           | all require extensive retrofitting. There are spark resistant
           | attic air access covers which are easy to install. We needed
           | to re-roof and remodel anyway so we went with fire-resistant
           | roofing and concrete siding. It's also important to have non-
           | cellular local communications because the cell towers often
           | go out first (our community uses 2-meter handsets for
           | emergency comms). Doing those things along with the fact
           | we've cleared all trees and brush out beyond 300 feet and
           | only have metal out-buildings caused our local fire chief to
           | comment that if everyone did what we've done, protecting the
           | whole region would be three times easier. We also have enough
           | generator power (on auto-failover) to pump our own well water
           | to wet down our house and surroundings. With that our house
           | has a really strong probability of surviving with no external
           | help even if our property is directly hit by a major
           | wildfire.
           | 
           | Edit to Add: I forgot to mention another key thing. If you
           | live in a place like this, there's often only a single narrow
           | public road serving your property and others nearby. Make
           | sure you have transportation that'll let you get out cross-
           | country if the road is blocked by either fire or heavy
           | equipment. We have AWD ATVs fueled and always ready to go
           | (plus they are handy around big properties like this).
           | Between us and our neighbors we have a plan to get everyone
           | on our road out without outside help - including a few
           | elderly folk who will need assistance. Firefighters needing
           | to rescue unprepared residents diverts vital resources from
           | fighting the fire and clogs roads - which just makes
           | everything else worse.
        
             | mackid wrote:
             | Great comments and advice. My neighborhood burned in the
             | #GlassFire [0]. While our property was severely damaged,
             | our home survived, due to many of the hardening techniques
             | you mentioned and great work by CalFire. We had evacuated
             | the night before and were staying in a local hotel watching
             | the flames advance on our house via our security cameras.
             | (Redundant net connections and a generator kept everything
             | online). As our deck started to burn I called 911 to report
             | it, figuring nothing would happen. About 20 minutes later a
             | fireman walked into the frame of the camera and 2 minutes
             | later the deck was out and the house was saved. I was
             | cheering like I won the Super Bowl. So I really appreciate
             | all the hardening I did, on-site water and CalFire.
             | 
             | When we rebuilt the exterior, I installed a set of
             | sprinklers that ring the house and cover the roof/deck.
             | They are not designed to fight the fire, instead I can
             | activate them before a fire arrives to get things good and
             | wet. This perimeter reduces the available fuels, reduces
             | the heat load on the structure and reduces the risk of
             | ember cast. It was a fun project with an ESP controller to
             | sequence the valves and provide remote control.
             | 
             | Over the last few years, the Alert Wildfire Camera system,
             | now over 700 cameras, has been a valuable resource. [1]
             | Early detection of the fire, before it grows to extreme
             | size has made a big difference. In the North Bay of
             | California last year, this early detection and CalFire
             | having nearby Air Attack resources on standby kept many
             | small fires from becoming large ones in this area.
             | 
             | Another great resource is the Watch Duty app. [2] This is a
             | non-profit, volunteer, but extremely professional service.
             | They started in Northern California and are rapidly
             | expanding. It is the go-to resource for Wildfire related
             | information in the area.
             | 
             | Lastly, if anyone is looking at the X prize for satellite
             | detection, I'd spend some time researching MODIS/VIIRS data
             | products from NASA. [3]. A good starting point in some of
             | the challenges of wildfire detection from space.
             | 
             | [0]. Fire tornado outside my window.
             | https://youtu.be/1tZjWqh3-EU
             | 
             | [1]. https://www.alertwildfire.org/
             | 
             | [2]. https://www.watchduty.org/
             | 
             | [3]. https://firms.modaps.eosdis.nasa.gov/
        
           | westurner wrote:
           | > _Hydrogel_
           | 
           | From https://twitter.com/westurner/status/1572664456210948104
           | :
           | 
           | >> _What about #CO2 -based #hydrogels for fire fighting?_
           | 
           | >> _/? Hydrogel firefighting (2022)
           | https://www.google.com/search?q=hydrogel+firefighting_ [...]
           | 
           | >> _IDEA: How to make #hydrogels (and #aerogels) from mostly
           | just {air*, CO2, algae, shade, and sunshine,} [on earth, and
           | eventually in space,]?_
        
             | westurner wrote:
             | > _Aerogel_
             | 
             | From
             | https://twitter.com/westurner/status/1600820322567041024 :
             | 
             | > _Problem: #airogel made of CO2 is an excellent insulator
             | that 's useful for many applications; but it needs
             | structure, so foam+airogel but that requires smelly foam_
             | 
             | > _Possible solution: Cause structure to form in the
             | airogel._
             | 
             | Backpack shoulder straps on e.g. Jansport backpacks have a
             | geometric rubber mesh that's visible through a plastic
             | window.
             | 
             | ## Possible methods of causing structure to form in aerogel
             | 
             | - EM Hz: literally play EM waves (and possibly deliberately
             | inverse convolutions) at the {#airogel,} production process
             | 
             | - Titratation
             | 
             | - Centrifugation
             | 
             | - "Volt grid": apply volts/amps/Hz patterns with a probe
             | array
             | 
             | - Thermal/photonic bath 3d printing
             | 
             | - Pour a lattice-like lens as large as the aerogel sections
             | and allow solar to cause it to slowly congeal to a more
             | structural form in advantageous shapes
             | 
             | - Die-casting, pressure-injection molding
        
           | westurner wrote:
           | > _Water-based batteries have less fire risk FWIU_
           | 
           | CAES Compressed Air Energy Storage and Gravitational
           | potential energy storage also have less fire risk then
           | Lithium Ion batteries.
           | 
           | FWIU we already have enough abandoned mines in the world to
           | do all of our energy storage needs?
           | 
           | Could CAES tanks filled with air+CO2 help suppress wildfire?
        
       | aaron695 wrote:
       | [dead]
        
       | pwython wrote:
       | Relevant article that explains how Trump may have actually been
       | correct in mitigating forest fires by "raking the floor,"
       | stemming from a conversation he had with Finland's president:
       | 
       | https://www.talouselama.fi/uutiset/finns-mock-trump-on-rakin...
       | 
       | Before the downvotes, please read the article. I have no
       | political affiliation in the US, and this may be one of the only
       | things Trump sorta maybe got right.
        
       | csh0 wrote:
       | Anyone interested in linking up to register as a team for either
       | track?
       | 
       | "Track A: Space-Based Wildfire Detection and Intelligence
       | 
       | In the Space-Based Wildfire Detection & Intelligence track, teams
       | will have one minute to accurately detect all fires across a
       | landscape larger than entire states or countries, and 10 minutes
       | to precisely characterize and report data with the least false
       | positives to two ground stations.
       | 
       | Track B: Autonomous Wildfire Response
       | 
       | In the Autonomous Wildfire Response track, teams have 10 minutes
       | to autonomously detect and suppress a high-risk fire in a 1,000
       | km2, environmentally challenging area, leaving any decoy fires
       | untouched."
       | 
       | I think these would be a fun problems work on. You can reach me
       | at: Fire(AT)cynical.io
       | 
       | I don't work in this space normally, currently I work as an SRE,
       | but I am motivated. :)
        
       | jpgvm wrote:
       | Wildfires aren't really the problem on a global scale. They are a
       | bit of a pain in Australia, and US West coast sure.
       | 
       | The real problematic fires are currently man-made and entirely
       | purposefully lit, i.e slash and burn agriculture. They are
       | destroying the air and huge amounts of rainforest and jungle in
       | places like Indonesia, Cambodia, Laos, Thailand, Myanmar, Brazil,
       | etc.
       | 
       | So while I commend the effort I think the bigger problem at hand
       | is working out how to switch these agriculture systems over to
       | more modern techniques and prevent further destruction of perhaps
       | irreplaceable forests.
       | 
       | Most wildfires are generally in fire-prone areas where fires is a
       | frequent and necessary part of life, detecting it sooner to save
       | lives is good, developing better back-burning techniques to
       | reduce intensity during fire season is also good. Just not as
       | much impact on the world as aforementioned agricultural burning.
       | 
       | Even though we are at the tail end of the burning season in SEA
       | you can still see how massive the problem is from this satelite
       | detector run by NASA: https://firms.modaps.eosdis.nasa.gov/map/
        
       | pupppet wrote:
       | Nothing like a video thumbnail of the entire planet on fire to
       | make me question your intent.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2023-04-21 23:01 UTC)