 |
|
|
|||||
As wildfire crews battled the Dragon Bravo Fire on the Grand Canyons North Rim in July 2025, the air turned toxic. A chlorine gas leak had erupted from the parks water treatment facility as the building burned, forcing firefighters to pull back. The water treatment facility is part of a system that draws water from a fragile spring. Its the only water source and system for the park facilities on both rims, including visitor lodging and park service housing. The fire also damaged some of the areas water pipes and equipment, leaving fire crews to rely on a fleet of large water trucks to haul in water and raising concerns about contamination risks to the water system itself. By mid-August, Dragon Bravo was a megafire, having burned over 140,000 acres, and was one of the largest fires in Arizona history. It had destroyed more than 70 structures, including the iconic Grand Canyon Lodge, and sent smoke across the region. Wildfires like this are increasingly affecting water supplies across the U.S. and creating a compounding crisis that experts in water, utilities and emergency management are only beginning to wrestle with. A pattern across the West Before 2017, when the Tubbs Fire burned through neighborhoods on the edge of Santa Rosa, California, most research on the nexus of wildfire and water had focused on issues such as drought and how climate change effects ecosystems. The Tubbs Fire destroyed thousands of buildings and also melted plastic water pipes. After the fire, a residents complaint about the taste and odor of tap water led to the discovery that the fires damage had introduced contaminants including benzene, a carcinogen, into parts of the public water system. It quickly became obvious that the damage discovered at the Tubbs Fire was not unique. Similar damage and pollutants were discovered in another California water system after the 2018 Camp Fire destroyed much of Paradise, a town of over 25,000 people. The list of incidents goes on. In southern Oregon, the 2020 Almeda Fire damaged water pipes in buildings, leaving water to flow freely. That contributed to low system pressure just when people fighting the fire needed the water. In Colorado, the 2021 Marshall Fire burned through urban water lines, damaging six public drinking-water systems along with more than 1,000 structures in the Boulder suburbs. All six systems lost power, which in some cases led to a loss of water pressure, hampering firefighting. As firefighters worked on the Marshall Fire, water system operators raced to keep water flowing and contaminants from being transported into the water systems. But tests still detected chemical contamination, including benzene, in parts of the systems a few weeks later. Then, in January 2025, the Los Angeles fires supercharged concerns about water and wildfire. As firefighters raced to put out multiple fires, hydrants ran dry in some parts of the region, while others at higher elevations depressurized. Ultimately, over 16,000 structures were damaged, leading to insured losses estimated to be as high as US$45 billion. Water infrastructure is not merely collateral damage during wildfiresit is now a central concern. It also raises the question: What can residents, first responders and decision-makers reasonably expect from water systems that werent designed with todays disasters in mind? Addressing the growing fire and water challenge While no two water systems or fires are the same, nearly every water system component, ranging from storage tanks to pipelines to treatment plants, is susceptible to damage. The Grand Canyons Roaring Springs system exemplifies the complexity and fragility of older systems. It supplies water to both rims of the park through a decades-old network of gravity-fed pipes and tunnels and includes the water treatment facility where firefighters were forced to retreat because of the chlorine leak. Many water systems have vulnerable points within or near flammable wildlands, such as exposed pump houses that are crucial for pulling water from lower elevations to where it is needed. In addition, hazardous materials such as chlorine or ammonia may be stored on-site and require special considerations in high fire risk areas. Staff capacity is often limited; some small utilities depend on a single operator, and budgets may be too constrained to modernize aging infrastructure or implement fire mitigation measures. As climate change intensifies wildfire seasons, these vulnerabilities can become disaster risks that require making water infrastructure a more integral part of fighting and preparing for wildfires. Ways to help everyone prepare As a researcher with Arizona State Universitys Julie Ann Wrigley Global Futures Laboratory, I have been working with colleagues and fire and water systems experts on strategies to help communities and fire and water managers prepare. Here are a few important lessons: Prioritizing fire-resistant construction, better shielding of chemicals and, in some cass, decentralizing water systems can help protect critical facilities, particularly in high-risk zones. Having backup power supplies, mobile treatment systems and alternate water sources are essential to provide more security in the face of a wildfire. Emergency command protocols and interagency coordination are most effective when they include water utilities as essential partners in all phases of emergency response, from planning to response to recovery. Fire crews and water operators can also benefit from joint training in emergency response, especially when system failure could hinder firefighting itself. Longer term, protecting upstream watersheds from severe fire by thinning forests and using controlled burns, along with erosion control measures, can help maintain water quality and reduce water pollution in the aftermath of fires. Smaller and more isolated systems, particularly in tribal or low-income communities, often need assistance to plan or implement new measures. These systems may require technical assistance, and regional support hubs could support communities with additional resources, including personnel and equipment, so they can respond quickly when crises strike. Looking ahead The Dragon Bravo Fire isnt just a wildfire story, its also a water story, and it signals a larger, emerging challenge across the West. As fire seasons expand in size and complexity, the overlap between fire and water will only grow. The Grand Canyon fire offers a stark illustration of how wildfire can escalate into a multifaceted infrastructure crisis: Fire can damage water infrastructure, which in turn limits firefighting capabilities and stresses water supplies. The question is not whether this will happen again. Its how prepared communities will be when it does. Faith Kearns is a scientist and director of research communication for the Arizona Water Innovation Initiative at Arizona State University. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Category:
E-Commerce
Years ago, we had a manager named Ania running one of our publishing operations. She was well-liked, diligent, and responsible. Still, we felt the business needed a more creative spark, so we brought in a rising executive to take her place. Ania transitioned out gracefully and left the company on good terms. Things turned out well. Our business thrived and Ania became a highly sought-after interior decorator, renowned for her creativity. The problem wasnt that she lacked any creative ability. The problem was that we werent giving her the type of challenges that excited her. While she languished in our business, she thrived in a different environment. The truth is that there is no such thing as a creative personality. You set the conditions for the people in your organization to be creative. But as you set those conditions, you also narrow possibilities, making the environment fertile ground for some, but barren for others. Every leader needs to learn to make those choices. Culture matters. You need to shape it with care. A Misfit Trying To Find His Place Not unlike Ania, Chester Carlson didnt quite fit in. Unsatisfied with his work at the patent department at Bell Labs, he wrote down hundreds of ideas, the vast majority of which never amounted to anything. He was eventually fired and went through a few more jobs after that. Chester was a man looking for his place in the world. There was one idea, however, that he kept coming back to. He worked on it for years, even while holding down a day job and going to law school at night. When his wife got tired of the putrid smells and explosions he made mixing chemicals in the kitchen, he moved his experiments to a second-floor room in a house his mother-in-law owned. Eventually, he conjured up a working prototype in 1939, but it was far from a viable product. He continued to tinker and, eventually, teamed up with the Haloid corporation in 1946. Together, they refined his product further, but it still cost nearly 10 times more than competitive machines. They tried to interest the great companies of the dayKodak, IBM and GEbut all demurred. Much like Chester himself, his invention didnt fit in. There just didnt seem to be a value proposition that would justify the cost of the machine. Yet Haloids CEO, Joe Wilson, saw potential. He figured that once companies had the machines, theyd make more copies than they ever imagined. Wilson also figured that Carlsons concept needed a name that would signal that it was something truly different and, after some deliberation, settled on xerography. And thats how the Xerox Corporation was born. The Rise And Fall Of A Business Model Wilson saw the challenge as a classic chicken-and-egg problem. Since nobody had ever used a Xerox machine before, they had no idea how useful they could be and werent willing to buy such an expensive product. At the same time, unless they bought the machines, they wouldnt ever use them and see the value. But what if Xerox leased the machines for a fraction of the cost and charged per copy? Since customers werent planning to make many copies, there was little risk in trying it out. Wilson was willing to bet that once the machines were installed, customers would discover needs they never knew they had. He calculated that the model would be profitable at 2,000 copies per month. In 1959, Xerox launched its 914 copier, which became an instant hit. The technology made copying so much easier that, before long, customers were averaging 2,000 copies per day, instead of per month. Wilsons bet had paid off. Revenues grew at a 41% compound annual rate for over a decade, and the small firm soon became a titan of American business. Xerox became laser-focused on optimizing its business model. Its profits depended on the number of copies printed and that became Xeroxs key performance metric. Everything the company didfrom how it designed its copiers to how it marketed and sold themwas rooted in that one simple principle. Yet the company eventually became a victim of its own success. Japanese competitors like Canon and Ricoh began selling simpler, cheaper copiers, based on 20-year-old technology, that were easier to use and needed less maintenance. Rather than staffing a copy room, companies could place these smaller, less expensive units on every floor. Xerox was being disrupted. Making Space For Misfits It was around this time that the company hired a young engineer named Gary Starkweather. Much like Ania and Chester, he found he didnt fit in. Part of the problem probably had something to do with his background. Copiers were largely based on chemistry and Garys interest was optics. In particular, he was excited about lasers. But it was more than that. Gary wanted to build something outside the copier business and, in a way that was uncannily similar to Chester Carlsons situation, the higher-ups just didnt see how it fit in with their business. In fact, his boss actually threatened to fire anyone who worked with Starkweather on the project. Eventually, he had enough. He marched into the vice presidents office and asked, Do you want me to do this for you or for someone else? In the business culture at the time, this was considered unheard of behavior, clearly a firing offense. Yet fate intervened and destiny had something very different in store for Gary Starkweather. As luck would have it, Xerox CEO Peter McColough was a bit of a visionary himself. He recognized the bind his company was in and wanted to shift the firms focus to the architecture of information. No one really knew what that meant, but a special unit, the Palo Alto Research Center (PARC), had been set up to figure it out. As luck would have it, the researcher there had been developing a technology called bitmapping that would revolutionize computer graphics. What they were missing was a technology that could bring those graphics into the physical world. An Organization Fit For Purpose At PARC, Xerox created a culture where creative minds could thrive. It was there that Alan Kay invented object-oriented software, Bob Metcalfe developed Ethernet, and so many other technologies were created that became central to the age of personal computers. Some of the technology was spun off into companies, such as 3Com and Adobe. It was also a place where Gary Starkweather, who had been a pariah in the old Xerox research lab back on the East Coast, found he fit right in. The technology he had been developing became the worlds first laser printer and brought the bitmapped graphics technology to life. As a product, it would prove to be so enormously profitable it would save Xerox. Yet even the most innovative cultures arent fertile ground for every idea. Two researchers at PARC, Dick Shoup and Alvy Ray Smith, were working on a new graphics technology called SuperPaint. Unfortunately, it didnt fit in with PARCs vision of personal computing. Much like Starkweather, the two were seen as outcasts and would go elsewhere. Smith would eventually team up with another graphics pioneer, Ed Catmull, at the New York Institute of Technology. Later, they joined George Lucas, who saw the potential for computer graphics to create a new paradigm for special effects. Eventually, the operation was spun out and bought by Steve Jobs. That company, Pixar, was sold to Disney in 2006 for $7.4 billion. Great leaders build cultures that are fit for purpose. That means you have to make choices. Inevitably, that means that some thingsand some peoplewont fit. And some will.
Category:
E-Commerce
Angus Fletcher is a professor of story science at Ohio States Project Narrative. His research has been endorsed by renowned psychologists, neuroscientists, and doctors, as well as having received support from major institutions such as the National Science Foundation. In 2023, he was awarded the Commendation Medal by the U.S. Army for his work. Whats the big idea? Examining the minds of visionary thinkers and U.S. Army Special Operators has solved many puzzles about how our brains work and how we can help our brains work better. From compiling these case studies, it is clear that there is a path for training your mind to act smart with limited information and outperform computer AI in terms of volatility and uncertainty. Below, Angus shares five key insights from his new book, Primal Intelligence: You Are Smarter Than You Know. Listen to the audio versionread by Angus himselfbelow, or in the Next Big Idea App. [Photo: Next Big Idea Club] 1. To activate your intuition, look for exceptions. For decades, Nobel-prize-winning cognitive scientists and psychologists such as Herbert Simon and Daniel Kahneman have told us that intuition is simply pattern matching. But young children score lower at pattern matching than they do at intuition. How is that possible? To answer this puzzle, I looked into the minds of Special Operators who possessed unusually high levels of intuition, allowing them to anticipate the future faster than other soldiers on the battlefield. These Operators had trained their brains to spot what the Army calls exceptional information. Exceptional information is an exception to a previously established rule. Its a warm-blooded reptile or a rainbow at night. Its the first person to split from the pack and do the unprecedented. Exceptional information is the opposite of a pattern. Its the breaking of a pattern. This is why children score high on intuition. Their brains are focused more on unusual details than on familiar patterns. A four-year-old child can spot up to ten times more exceptional information than the average adult. If you happen to be one of those average adults, dont worry. You can train your brain to get better at spotting exceptions. One way to improve your intuition is to travel. Travel immerses your brain in places that break the pattern of your regular life, activating your brains power to spot exceptions by putting you in situations where everything is exceptional. If you dont have the time or the budget to take a trip, you can get a quick dose of mind-travel from authors like Shakespeare. Shakespeare fills his plays with characters who are exceptions to conventional narrative formulas: Hamlet is an action hero who thinks deeply; Cleopatra is a cold-blooded schemer with a loving heart; Falstaff is an old man who behaves like an adolescent. By giving us characters who break archetypal patterns, Shakespeare opens our minds to the exceptional. In the words of Hamlet: As a stranger, give it welcome. Embrace things because they are different. Because characters like Hamlet activate intuition, Shakespeares readers have a history of anticipating the future. Shakespeare reader Nikola Tesla spotted the exception known as the AC motor and used it to usher in modern technology. Shakespeare reader Marie Curie spotted the exception known as radioactivity and used it to usher in modern physics. Shakespeare reader Vincent van Gogh spotted the exception known as aquamarine and used it to usher in our modern color palette. To boost your intuition, dont think in patterns. Instead, think in exceptions. 2. Optimism comes from the past. Were often told by psychologists and business gurus that optimism is more effective than pessimism. But if optimism works better, then why do we keep needing to be reminded? Why hasnt optimism naturally replaced pessimism, like steel tools naturally replaced stone ones? Optimism isnt more effective than pessimism. But, in fact, the psychologists are right. Optimism prompts our brain to take chances that lead to growth, so over time, it does win out over pessimism. But if optimism is biologically stronger than pessimism, why does it seem so fragile? Why do so many of us keep falling back into pessimism? If optimism works better, then why do we keep needing to be reminded? The answer is: Were taught optimism wrong. Were taught that optimism is the belief: This will succeed. But thats not optimism. Its magical thinking. Magical thinking preaches the power of a technique known as visualizing success. Visualizing success has been promoted by bestsellers such as Rhonda Burns The Secret and Tony Robbins Awaken the Giant Within. It was first popularized almost a century ago by Napoleon Hills 1937 book, Think and Grow Rich. In that book, Hill tells us: When visualizing the money you intend to accumulate, (with closed eyes), see yourself rendering the service, or delivering the merchandise you intend to give in return for this money. This is important! But no, in fact, this is nonsense. Real optimism isnt convincing ourselves that this will succeed. Real optimism is much, much stronger. Real optimism is this can succeed. Why is can stronger than will? If you tell yourself that you will succeed and you dont, your confidence cracks. But if you tell yourself that you can succeed, then youll retain the faith, no matter how many times you fail, as long as you succeed once. That one success is all you need to keep possibility alive, which is why can lives on long after will has shattered. The way to build optimism isnt by visualizing all the success you will have in the future. Its to remember one time you were successful in the past. Unlike magical thinking, which cant survive reality, this method is so resilient that Special Operators call it antifraile, because no amount of defeat or death can dim it. Next time you are drifting toward pessimism, remember a time when you succeeded. That memory is stronger than any magic, and with it, you wont ever need to be reminded to be optimistic again. 3. Your brain is smarter in volatility than AI will ever be. Computers are more logical than humans. And they can crunch more data, faster. So why is it taking AI so long to replace us? To answer this puzzle, I studied Special Operators who acted smart in situations where AI malfunctioned. Those situations were all different, except for one factor: they were new situations, so there was little to no reliable data about them. If there was no data about these situations, how were Operators able to outperform random luck? The answer dates back to the Cambrian Explosion, also known as the Big Bang of life, which occurred approximately 500 million years ago. In that prehistoric age, the visual circuits of the archaic brain were evolving the capacity to think in data and symbolic logic. Which is to say, the brain was evolving the ability to think like a computer. But at that time, the archaic brain was also evolving another complementary mechanism of intelligence. That other intelligence is technically known as narrative cognition. But we can more simply call it: thinking in story. Although thinking in story can be a liability in high-data environments, it enables us to act smarter than computers in volatility and uncertainty. Story imbued the brain with imagination, wisdom, and other capacities that helped it act intelligently in hazy and fast-changing ecosystems, where relentless competition for resources generated continual innovation, producing new life forms and environments about which there was little or no reliable information. Although thinking in story can be a liability in high-data environments, it enables us to act smarter than computers in volatility and uncertainty. Which is why, when we studied the brains of those Special Operators who performed well in volatility, we discovered that they were exceptionally good at thinking in story. 4. Art and theater make you smarter at real life. The more time that children spend in school, the more anxious and angry they get. Whats the problem? Is it too much technology use? Or are we being too niceand overcoddling our kids? No. Neither technology nor overcoddling is the root cause of student anger and anxiety. To find the real culprit, lets start with the anger and anxiety. These emotions are physiological indicators of a threat response. The logical way to eliminate this threat response is to remove the threat. Schools have tried this by focusing on creating safe spaces and excluding things from classrooms that might cause children to feel anxious or angry. This solution is logical, but its not biological. In the real world, what stops the brains threat response isnt an outside force that removes the threat. Its an inside force, within the brain, that comes up with a plan for dealing with the threat. You can see this in Special Operators. Special Operators dont spend their lives trying to avoid threats. They spend their lives running toward threats. Yet those threats dont make Operators anxious or angry. Why? Because as rapidly as the world can create a threat, the Operators brains are able to imagine a plan for dealing with it. They dont feel anxiety or anger because they have trained their imaginations to evolve at the speed of life. To do that training, Operators go through special classes at the John F. Kennedy Special Warfare School, where they exercise their imagination by engaging in role-playing exercises. Outside of Special Operations, in kindergarten through college classrooms, role-playing can be taught by doing theater, literature, history, and other arts and humanities activities that encourage students to imagine themselves as other people in other parts of the world. They dont feel anxiety or anger because they have trained their imaginations to evolve at the speed of life. In schools, these role-playing activities are increasingly being replaced by technology, which delivers art and history to students on computers and digital screens. But technology is less effective at growing childrens imagination than books and stages, because by having screens automate the physical work of staging the action, it doesnt exercise the imagination muscles of the brain. Although technology and too much coddling can worsen student anger and anxiety, neither is the root cause of the problem. The root cause is that were not giving students enough of the history books and theater roles that strengthen their brains ability to imagine plans, empowering them to live like Special Operators and deal with threats themselves. 5. Leaders dont think in probabilities. Businesses spend approximately $16 billion annually on leadership training. While that training gets good marks for producing managers, it gets poor marks for producing leaders. Whats the training missing? The training is missing the brains premotor cortex. Its focused instead on the inferior parietal lobe. To translate that out of neuroscience, current business training is focused on teaching executives to think in probability. So, it isnt expanding their ability to think in possibility. Possibility is often misunderstood as a low-end probability, say, for example, ten percent. But possibility is not a kind of probability. It involves a fundamentally different mental process. Probability is calculated from events that have happened before. Meanwhile, possibility is an event that has never happenedbut could happen, because it doesnt contradict the rules of life. Probability is the method used in statistics and computer AI. Possibility is the method of story and imagination. As an example of the difference between probability and possibility, theres the airplane. In 1902, the British statistician Lord Kelvin declared that there would never be an airplane. But a year later, the Wright Brothers built one and it flew. Was Lord Kelvin a fool? No. He was one of the best mathematicians of his time. But he was thinking in probability. And the probability of an airplane in 1902 was zero, because it had never happened before. Possibility is the method of story and imagination. The Wright Brothers saw, however, that the airplane didnt violate the laws of physicsmaking it possible. As a result, they were able to engage in original thinking, enterprise, and initiative. These are the key mental qualities of entrepreneurs, and of leaders in general. If you want to train leadersor become a leader yourselfdont invest in training that emphasizes probability. Steer clear of scientific management and other fields heavy in math, statistics, and quantitative approaches. Instead, do like the Wright Brothers and boost your practical imagination by feeding your brain with realistic tales of make-believe. The Wright brothers often skipped school to stay home reading the creative novels of Charles Dickens, Mark Twain, and Washington Irving. If those literary classics dont match your taste, do like Special Operators and read ovels set in the near future or in a culture thats different from yours. These stories will stimulate your brains premotor cortex, expanding your sense of possibility and helping your leadership abilities take flight. This article originally appeared in Next Big Idea Club magazine and is reprinted with permission.
Category:
E-Commerce
All news |
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||