A cost-benefit analysis of WildFireSat, a wildfire monitoring satellite mission for Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In anticipation of growing wildfire management challenges, the Canadian government is investing in WildFireSat, an Earth observation satellite mission designed to collect data in support of Canadian wildfire management. Although costs of the mission can be reasonably estimated, the benefits of such an investment are unknown. Here we forecast the possible benefits of WildFireSat via an avoided cost approach. We consider five socio-economic components: suppression costs (fixed and variable), timber losses, property, asset and infrastructure losses, evacuation costs, and smoke related health costs. Using a Monte Carlo analysis, we evaluated a range of possible changes to these components based on expert opinions. The resulting Net Present Value (NPV) estimates depend on the presumed impact of using WildFireSat decision support data products, with pessimistic and conservative assumptions generating mission costs that typically exceed potential benefits by 1.16 to 1.59 times, while more optimistic assumptions generate benefits in excess of costs by 8.72 to 10.48 times. The analysis here excludes some possibly significant market and non-market impacts expected from WildFireSat due to data limitations; accounting for these additional impacts would likely generate positive NPVs under even cautious impact assumptions.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".