New fire-fighting technology could help put them out. Why isn’t it being used?
Guest post by Paul Driessen
Millions of Americans watched their evening news in horrified fascination.
The Colorado Springs wildfire had doubled in size overnight, to 24 square miles – half the size of San Francisco – as 50-mph gusts carried fiery branches from exploding treetops across fire breaks, down Waldo Canyon and into fresh stands of drought-dried timber. Flames crested the ridge above the beautiful Air Force Academy campus, 346 houses burned, hundreds more faced immolation, and 32,000 people were evacuated, through smoke and ash that turned daytime into a choking night sky.
130 miles north, another monster fire west of Fort Collins consumed 136 square miles of forest and torched 259 homes. By July 4, this year’s Colorado forest fires had devoured 170,000 acres – 265 square miles, nearly five times the size of Washington, DC. Across eleven western states, nearly 2,000,000 acres have already burned this year; imagine all of Delaware and Rhode Island ablaze.
People died. Many homes are now nothing but ashes, chimneys and memories. In the forests, the infernos exterminated wildlife habitats, roasted eagle and spotted owl fledglings alive in their nests, boiled away trout and trout streams, left surviving birds and mammals to starve for lack of food, and incinerated every living organism in the thin soils, presaging massive erosion that will clog streambeds during downpours and snowmelts. Many areas will not recover their foliage or biodiversity for decades.
Having hiked in many of these areas, I’ve been truly depressed by these infernos. Why were they allowed to happen? “We are doing everything possible to control these blazes,” officials insist. One has to wonder.
Put aside the insanity of letting horse-blindered environmentalists, bureaucrats and judges obstruct even selective cutting to thin dense stands of timber or remove trees killed by beetles, after decades of Smoky the Bear management. Forget for a moment that these policies turn forests into closely bunched matchsticks, waiting for lightning bolts, sparks, untended campfires or arsonists to start conflagrations.
Ignore the guideline that say fires in these areas can be extinguished if they are of human origin (if making that distinction is even possible in the midst of an inferno) – but must be allowed to burn if they are “natural” (caused by lightning, for example), even amid droughts, in the hope that they won’t become raging infernos that threaten homes. Disregard the crazy jurisdictional disputes that prevent aircraft from dropping water on a fire, because the crew cannot tell whether the blaze is on Bureau of Land Management or Forest Service land.
Pay no mind to the fact that these fires emit prodigious amounts of carbon dioxide – along with large quantities of mercury, particulates and other pollutants. (Many rock formations contain mercury; trees absorb it through their roots, and release it into the atmosphere when they burn.)
Once a fire erupts, there is no reason it should devastate homes, suburban developments or vast forest areas. The technology exists to stop these fires, long before they reach such intensities and proportions.
Two days before Waldo Canyon burst into flames, a revolutionary fire suppressant stopped a 300-acre fire north of Albuquerque, New Mexico almost in its tracks. Just nine single-engine planeloads of FireIce (about 7,200 gallons) were needed to douse the flames, prevent nearby trees and homes from igniting, and insure that the fire remained permanently extinguished.
Dutch Snyder, the independent 27-year veteran fire-fighting pilot whose airplane handled this successful mission, remarked afterward that he had “never seen a retardant hold a fire line” so well, or “any product knock down a fire so quickly.”
According to its inventor, GelTech Solutions chief technology officer Peter Cordani, FireIce smothers fires, by taking heat and oxygen away from combustible materials. It can be dropped directly onto a fire, penetrating through to burning trees and brush – rather than just being dropped far from flames, in often futile efforts to create fire breaks that hold.
As many news outlets, like Fox 21 KXRM-TV in Colorado Springs, have documented in recent years (visit the GelTech website for video clips), this product can be dropped by plane to suppress wildfire intensity, or sprayed by homeowners on houses and landscaping to protect them from heat and flames. Even a 2,000-degree F blowtorch cannot ignite a wood board (or burn a human hand) coated in FireIce.
The product is non-toxic, non-corrosive and environment-friendly, Cordani says in the news stories. It’s been tested, certified and approved by the US Forest Service, which has FireIce and GelTech on its “qualified products list” of fire-battling chemicals and professionals. The company maintains its own state-of-the-art mixing equipment and is ready at a moment’s notice to assist aerial and ground fire-fighting operations anywhere in the USA. It can fill trucks and airplanes of any size, including 3,000-gallon Air Force C-130s and even 10,000-gallon DC-10 supertankers.
Duly impressed, I called the company to ask what role it was playing in fighting the Colorado blazes and why its technology apparently was not working. The answer shocked me. It had not been asked to help!
Despite all the news stories about FireIce, its certification by the USFS, and frequent communications between GelTech and federal, state and local officials – no one had contacted the company.
How is that possible? What will it take to persuade officials to break from traditional (and obviously inadequate) wildfire tactics and retardants, and use FireIce to combat what Colorado Springs Fire Chief Rich Brown called fires of “epic proportions” – to protect homes, habitats, wildlife and human lives?
New Mexico has now used FireIce with great success against several forest fires. With a long fire season still ahead, perhaps US Forest Service Chief Tom Tidwell, Rocky Mountain Regional Forester Dan Jiron, Colorado Governor John Hickenlooper, Fort Collins and Colorado Springs Mayors Karen Weithunat and Steve Bach will now follow the example set by Governor Susana Martinez and her colleagues in the Land of Enchantment.
If they do not, responsible legislators and environmentalists should find out why – so that tragedies like these Colorado fires never happen again.
____________
Paul Driessen is senior policy advisor for the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow, a ten-year Colorado resident, legislative aide for former US Senator Bill Armstrong of Colorado, former policy analyst for the US Department of the Interior, and author of Eco-Imperialism: Green power – Black death.
Related articles
- The Great Fire Of 1910 Places The Current 2012 Fire Season In Perspective (pielkeclimatesci.wordpress.com)
- Western U.S. Will Keep Burning Unless Fire Policy Changes – Bloomberg (bloomberg.com)
- In Colorado wildfires, ‘worst in state history’, why won’t the Forest Service use the biggest firefighting tool available? (wattsupwiththat.com)
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Old firefighting technology would help, too — if it was still available. Unfortunately, the Obama Administration effectively decommissioned much of it last summer, by abruptly cancelling the contract for use of the planes which were the core of the U.S. Forrest Service’s aerial firefighting capabilities, and thereby putting out of business the company that both operated those planes and produced and maintained the key firefighting subsystem used in the best of the remaining firefighting planes:
http://monkeywrenchingamerica.com/?p=1412
http://www.bostonglobe.com/news/nation/2012/07/08/new-parts-support-for-wildfire-system/ukvgabDt0PlgwsyUW17u2N/story.html
Maybe the company didn’t make campaign donations to the right party?
My guess is that FireIce is just too expensive and and the fire fighting service is resisting due to budget limitations. I wouldn’t want to be the one making that decision. Perhaps GelTech should have announced a “fire sale” this year until the USFS was dependent on it’s product before raising prices. A price check may tell the story. As usual… follow the money. GK
Maybe the company could get a contract from Russia?
Paul,
There were over 400 lightning events near my home in the Sierra foothills on Sunday night. Luckily for us none of the events caused a fire in the forests near my homestead. I HOPE our fire districts are 1) aware of FireIce 2) the positive results that New Mexico has had with the product.
My legislature is going to be charging me a fire protection fee (as our state is broke and they have to find $ from somewhere) of $150.00 a habitable building shortly. I will be letting CAL Fire and my local fire districts know about FireIce later today. I live rather close to a small municipal airport, surrounded by VERY dry timberlands.
I will be stopping up at the airport later today to provide them a copy of your article.
This whole mess underscores the problem of “What belongs to all, belongs to no one.” None of the government bureaucrats has hardly any skin in the game at all. Washington none at all.
Privatize the National Forests. Let the Nature Conservancy, or even, ha, the Sierra Club take responsibility for the survival of the forests. We’d soon see a significant change in the management practices. Navel gazing idiots wouldn’t be able to ignore fires any longer.
Hiking through desolation isn’t nearly as much fun as hiking through beauty. Swiss hiking trails and the Swiss Alpen Club would be good models for caring individuals to follow.
I suspect Georgia Pacific or a number of other for profit organizations would take far better care of this resource than the governments do – either national or state. The pine plantations in the South have far fewer wildfires than our national forests and it isn’t coincidence.
The idiocy of government never ceases to amaze me. If incompetence like this happened in the private sector, heads would roll.
I assume this is way oversimplified. In New Mexico this year we had our largest (on record) fire this season. The fire north of Albuquerque was in a critical area….cost of the retardant, availability of the material; trained people and equipment to deploy it, and proximity to housing and or other infrastructure must all be considered, I assume. The same people bitch about Gov spending and then are very critical when Gov resources are strained and or lacking in a time of need.
Do you want government to do stuff but you don’t want to pay for it with taxes.
So somehow if fire fighting is done by private companies it’s all going to be cheaper. I can’t imagine how that’s going to work.
Eastern Australia is currently undergoing vegetal regrowth on a truly phenomenal scale. This is due to abundant rain in the last half-decade, but also to more efficient use of agricultural land, regrowth on hobby farms, in vanity National Parks (eyeroll), in proper National Parks, poor conditions (too bloody wet) for back-burning, poor policy on back-burning, underfunding and reduction of forestry etc etc
There is such a thing as substantial and long-term climate change. It happened in Eastern Oz after 2007. It caused massive, massive, massive regrowth. (And I think I left out a “massive”.) Just a reminder to our Green Betters that this regrowth is, shall we say, combustible. I don’t want to distract them from the more important task of checking the carbon footprint and Green Rating of the various brands of fire pumps, however…
Return public forests to states and let counties manage them. Fire fighters should be called upon by county public forest managers to fight whatever fire they want extinguished. There should be no federal lands. Period. Finally, people should be allowed to purchase catastophic flood, fire, wind, and earthquake insurance and bear the burden of losing their home to such events. If you can’t afford the insurance, you should consider not owning a home, or at least be ready to lose it without whining. Harsh? Not a bit. This country was built under such personal responsibility (and yes, harsh tragedy). Why do we need a nursery with nannies now?
Several things here. The arrogant administration cares less of anything west of Pennsylvania Ave. The incompetent bureaucrats of the various agencies responsible for managing western forest lands are turf protectors; they too care less of anything west of Pennsylvania Ave. Living in what 40 years ago was uninhabited forest is a risk. Old Denver burned to the ground, so it became law that all homes be brick… well, that was a long time ago. Fire protection is a myth. The public is apathetic and simply do not care outside the local devastation and why should they?
Sounds very familiar.
Remember the BP oil spill in the Gulf? All the clean-up boats were sitting in the harbors, with the bureaucrats going nuts over the boats having enough vests on board. Floating oil barriers were sitting on land, the companies producing them ready to pump out hundreds and thousands of yards, but nobody thought of giving them a call.
Never let a good crisis go to waste. Meanwhile, the so called president is golfing and the rest of the so called leaders twiddles their thumbs. It’s probably Bush’s fault, just like everything else.
There is something like the Evergreen Supertanker, a heavily modified 747. She’s also sitting on the ground, last deployment to a fire was last June.
@lazy teenager.
Who said it is going to be done by private firefighting companies?
Why not buy fireice and not the current firefighting chemical?
Or are you saying that we should pay our global warming taxes so that we can afford to deal with the catastrophic fires that will surely (possibly, maybe, perhaps, could) be a consequence.
I have always paid any taxes the government have charged. Every single cent. How about you? I do not believe in Catastrophic Global warming, but I have still paid my green taxes this year. How about you?
I would much rather the government spent money on this technology than on anything to do with Catastrophic Global warming. How about you?
My guess? As with the last time I asked you a question, you will not reply.
(PS, Mods, I am not currently in the UK, but this is me.)
[REPLY: Never doubted you for an instant. -REP]
I responded as a volunteer to the ~18,000 acre, Texas Tri-county wildfires in Sept 2011 and witnessed devastation and gross government incompetence. The fire began on Monday and immediately local officals established a fire command center at the Magnolia High School, assisting evacuation and direction of assets. Local business provided food, snacks, water and ice. By Wednesday an incredible ogranization had developed, providing three hot meals per day to the thousand fire fighters and law enforcement responders. On Thursday evening FEMA ARRIVED with their easels, poster boards and multicolored markers. In a Friday morning discussion with the Texas DPS Aviation Director i learned that the ONLY federal aerial tanker was deployed out of Abilene, only made daytime drops and with turn around, only made ONE flight per day. I had lunch on Friday with the newly arrived professional fire fighters from the west coast. They marveled at the volunteer relief effort, but stated that all of this would very soon come to an end.
The operation was to be federalized and ONLY FEMA APPROVED CONTRACTORS COULD PROVIDE SERVICES. Since California was the home of the nations most ‘experienced’ FEMA contractors, it would soon be a California directed effort. When i asked why i was told….”A FEMA contractor can get $5 for a boloney sandwich and that is all that they will feed the responders with”. When i mentioned this to another volunteer i was escorted from the command center. A local grocery chain had responded with three 18 wheeler trucks, one with dry goods, one refrigerated water, one with ice. In additon this local grocer provided a mobile kitchen, and seperate mobile mens and womens restroom trailers. All of these assets were ORDERED removed by FEMA. We are the government and we are here to assist you…now shut up and behave incompetent.
“I would much rather the government spent money on this technology than on anything to do with Catastrophic Global warming.”
Yes, and there seemed to be plenty of money for certain banks, friends of certain bankers, Solyndra, and nationalizing GM
Well, I’m early to this thread, so only 14 comments as I write this. I wonder if it will turn into another thread where we learn most the pluses and minuses of the proposed solution, as we did with the recent Evergreen Tanker discussion? I suspect that will be the case.
Best observation made thus far, by wsbriggs: The pine forests in the Southeast, most of which are privately owned by paper/lumber companies, never seem to experience the sort of wildfires we (taxpayers) are forced to pay to fight in our western, national (taxpayer-owned) forests.
Maybe we (taxpayers) have hired the wrong manager of our (taxpayer-owned) resources? And I believe the private companies even make some money off of their forest resources. Imagine that. I also doubt very much you can find a Google view of their forests that resembles the wasted pile of matchsticks in some of our beetle infested national forests out west. But I guess there aren’t any pests in the Southeast? Or maybe they just have better management?
You story could make a good political ad for the coming campaign, especially in combination with similar stories and stories about the Obama administration’s blundering at the time of the Gulf oil spill. But the Republicans will be too dopey to take advantage of it. Maybe the Tea Party could do something, albeit with amateur production values.
LazyTeenager says:
July 24, 2012 at 6:52 am
Do you want government to do stuff but you don’t want to pay for it with taxes.
So somehow if fire fighting is done by private companies it’s all going to be cheaper. I can’t imagine how that’s going to work.
###
Of course because your a brain washed fool.
What “daveburton” says may well be true, but I have to applaud the men and women that kept the tankers that were available flying. I can’t even imagine the work required to fix and service the constant stream of airplanes and helicopters flying over my house from dawn to dusk, and the effort of the the aircrews themselves to maintain safety and professionalism in a truly trying situation.
Hats of to all of those in the air and on the ground that fought these fires
Then that means that someone wanted a fire of that size. Dunno who. Probably an entity that thrives on and takes advantage of a crisis, never letting one “go to waste”.
The other option is that the bloated bureaucracy is too large to handle a simple decision that would save lives and homes.
“Never attribute to malice that which can be explained by incompetence” if you wish to be forgiving. I’m not. I don’t trust that easily.
And reference to my July 24, 2012 at 8:10 am
Don’t forget the VLAT issue…
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/06/30/in-colorado-wildfires-worst-in-state-history-why-wont-the-forest-service-use-the-biggest-firefighting-tool-available/
LazyTeenager says:
July 24, 2012 at 6:52 am
“Do you want government to do stuff but you don’t want to pay for it with taxes.”
So, to say that you want response spending is to say that you don’t want any taxes and government services at all?
Pamela Gray says:
July 24, 2012 at 7:08 am
“Return public forests to states and let counties manage them. Fire fighters should be called upon by county public forest managers to fight whatever fire they want extinguished. There should be no federal lands. Period. Finally, people should be allowed to purchase catastophic flood, fire, wind, and earthquake insurance and bear the burden of losing their home to such events. If you can’t afford the insurance, you should consider not owning a home, or at least be ready to lose it without whining. Harsh? Not a bit. This country was built under such personal responsibility (and yes, harsh tragedy). Why do we need a nursery with nannies now?”
Pamela, absolutely, 100% spot on. The management of federal forests (National Forests and BLM) have been a joke for at least the last 20 years, wasting billions of taxpayers dollars, and mismanaging an extremely valuable, RENEWABLE natural resource right down the toilet.
wsbriggs says:
July 24, 2012 at 5:48 am
“…The pine plantations in the South have far fewer wildfires than our national forests and it isn’t coincidence.”
Ummm…not exactly. I agreed with most of your post, but this isn’t quite right. Yes, the pine plantations in the southeastern US ARE much better managed than “public” forests in the west. However, when a thunderstorm rolls through Georgia in July it rains buckets.
When thunderstorms roll through John Day, Oregon in July, if lucky there might be a drop here, a drop there, but not enough moisture hitting the ground to make a difference. Dry cold fronts remain the major cause of large wildfire outbreaks in the west.
And while we’re on the subject, those of us in the west who make our living from the vast forests that surround us, are sick and damn tired of urban elites 3000 miles away telling us how these forest should (not) be managed. As Pamela pointed out, at a minimum, management of federal forests should be returned to the counties in which they reside.