Geology topics

A. Bar-Massada

Publications and source records attributed to A. Bar-Massada.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

USGS2012

Combining satellite-based fire observations and ground-based lightning detections to identify lightning fires across the conterminous USA

Lightning fires are a common natural disturbance in North America, and account for the largest proportion of the area burned by wildfires each year. Yet, the spatiotemporal patterns of lightning fires in the conterminous US are not well understood due to limitations of existing fire databases. Our goal here was to develop and test an algorithm that combined MODIS fire detections with lightning detections from the National Lightning Detection Network to identify lightning fires across the conterminous US from 2000 to 2008. The algorithm searches for spatiotemporal conjunctions of MODIS fire clusters and NLDN detected lightning strikes, given a spatiotemporal lag between lightning strike and fire ignition. The algorithm revealed distinctive spatial patterns of lightning fires in the conterminous US While a sensitivity analysis revealed that the algorithm is highly sensitive to the two thresholds that are used to determine conjunction, the density of fires it detected was moderately correlated with ground based fire records. When only fires larger than 0.4 km 2 were considered, correlations were higher and the root-mean-square error between datasets was less than five fires per 625 km 2 for the entire study period. Our algorithm is thus suitable for detecting broad scale spatial patterns of lightning fire occurrence, and especially lightning fire hotspots, but has limited detection capability of smaller fires because these cannot be consistently detected by MODIS. These results may enhance our understanding of large scale patterns of lightning fire activity, and can be used to identify the broad scale factors controlling fire occurrence.

IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Applied Earth O↗

USGS2011

Effects of ignition location models on the burn patterns of simulated wildfires

Fire simulation studies that use models such as FARSITE often assume that ignition locations are distributed randomly, because spatially explicit information about actual ignition locations are difficult to obtain. However, many studies show that the spatial distribution of ignition locations, whether human-caused or natural, is non-random. Thus, predictions from fire simulations based on random ignitions may be unrealistic. However, the extent to which the assumption of ignition location affects the predictions of fire simulation models has never been systematically explored. Our goal was to assess the difference in fire simulations that are based on random versus non-random ignition location patterns. We conducted four sets of 6000 FARSITE simulations for the Santa Monica Mountains in California to quantify the influence of random and non-random ignition locations and normal and extreme weather conditions on fire size distributions and spatial patterns of burn probability. Under extreme weather conditions, fires were significantly larger for non-random ignitions compared to random ignitions (mean area of 344.5 ha and 230.1 ha, respectively), but burn probability maps were highly correlated ( r = 0.83). Under normal weather, random ignitions produced significantly larger fires than non-random ignitions (17.5 ha and 13.3 ha, respectively), and the spatial correlations between burn probability maps were not high ( r = 0.54), though the difference in the average burn probability was small. The results of the study suggest that the location of ignitions used in fire simulation models may substantially influence the spatial predictions of fire spread patterns. However, the spatial bias introduced by using a random ignition location model may be minimized if the fire simulations are conducted under extreme weather conditions when fire spread is greatest.

California↗

USGS2009

Wildfire risk in the wildland-urban interface: A simulation study in northwestern Wisconsin

The rapid growth of housing in and near the wildland–urban interface (WUI) increases wildfire risk to lives and structures. To reduce fire risk, it is necessary to identify WUI housing areas that are more susceptible to wildfire. This is challenging, because wildfire patterns depend on fire behavior and spread, which in turn depend on ignition locations, weather conditions, the spatial arrangement of fuels, and topography. The goal of our study was to assess wildfire risk to a 60,000 ha WUI area in northwestern Wisconsin while accounting for all of these factors. We conducted 6000 simulations with two dynamic fire models: Fire Area Simulator (FARSITE) and Minimum Travel Time (MTT) in order to map the spatial pattern of burn probabilities. Simulations were run under normal and extreme weather conditions to assess the effect of weather on fire spread, burn probability, and risk to structures. The resulting burn probability maps were intersected with maps of structure locations and land cover types. The simulations revealed clear hotspots of wildfire activity and a large range of wildfire risk to structures in the study area. As expected, the extreme weather conditions yielded higher burn probabilities over the entire landscape, as well as to different land cover classes and individual structures. Moreover, the spatial pattern of risk was significantly different between extreme and normal weather conditions. The results highlight the fact that extreme weather conditions not only produce higher fire risk than normal weather conditions, but also change the fine-scale locations of high risk areas in the landscape, which is of great importance for fire management in WUI areas. In addition, the choice of weather data may limit the potential for comparisons of risk maps for different areas and for extrapolating risk maps to future scenarios where weather conditions are unknown. Our approach to modeling wildfire risk to structures can aid fire risk reduction management activities by identifying areas with elevated wildfire risk and those most vulnerable under extreme weather conditions.

Wisconsin↗