Interview: practitioners on flood, drought & wildfire resilience

In 2024, the planet experienced 58 billion-dollar weather disasters—the second-highest count on record—generating $320–$402 billion in global economic losses according to Munich Re and Aon. The United States alone recorded 27 billion-dollar events totaling $182.7 billion in damages, with Hurricanes Helene ($56B) and Milton ($60B) devastating communities across the Southeast. By January 2025, the Los Angeles wildfires had already established a sobering new benchmark: $61.2 billion in losses, making them the costliest wildfire event in recorded history. Against this backdrop of accelerating climate impacts, practitioners across utilities, municipalities, and private enterprise are fundamentally reimagining how we design, finance, and deploy resilience infrastructure. This article synthesizes insights from leading practitioners to provide engineers and decision-makers with an actionable buyer's guide for evaluating flood, drought, and wildfire resilience solutions.

Why It Matters

The compound nature of climate hazards—where droughts exacerbate wildfire conditions, post-fire landscapes amplify flood risks, and aging infrastructure buckles under repeated stress—demands integrated resilience strategies. The economic rationale is unambiguous: every $1 invested in disaster prevention generates $4 in avoided losses for wildfire mitigation and $10+ for broader disaster preparedness, according to the National Institute of Building Sciences and Munich Re studies respectively.

Beyond immediate economic considerations, resilience investments increasingly determine insurance availability, property values, and municipal bond ratings. Communities lacking demonstrated adaptation measures face insurance market withdrawals—as witnessed across California, Florida, and Louisiana—creating feedback loops that accelerate population displacement and stranded assets. For engineers and infrastructure planners, understanding the resilience technology landscape has shifted from a specialized competency to a core professional requirement.

The 2024 National Preparedness Report from FEMA underscored that 90% of U.S. counties experienced a federally declared disaster in the preceding decade, fundamentally altering how practitioners must approach capital planning, maintenance cycles, and community engagement. The convergence of satellite technology, AI-driven analytics, and parametric insurance products has created new intervention points across the resilience value chain—but navigating this rapidly evolving ecosystem requires structured evaluation frameworks.

Key Concepts

Effective resilience planning requires fluency in several interconnected domains:

Parametric Insurance vs. Traditional Indemnity: Parametric products trigger payouts based on objective physical parameters (e.g., rainfall exceeding a threshold, wind speeds, satellite-detected flood extent) rather than assessed damages. This enables claims settlement in days rather than months—critical for community recovery timelines. Companies like Floodbase leverage 17+ satellite data sources with AI processing to underwrite previously uninsurable flood risks in developing economies.

Defense-in-Depth Architecture: Modern resilience strategies layer multiple intervention types across prevention, detection, response, and recovery phases. Detection advances have been particularly dramatic: OroraTech's 8-satellite constellation delivers 3-minute wildfire alerts using thermal imaging that penetrates smoke, while ground-based IoT networks from Dryad Networks detect particulate matter and gas signatures within minutes of ignition.

Nature-Based Solutions (NbS): Increasingly recognized as cost-effective risk reduction mechanisms, NbS approaches—wetland restoration, strategic reforestation, controlled burns—deliver ecosystem co-benefits alongside hazard mitigation. The World Economic Forum's January 2026 "From Wildfire Risk to Resilience" framework positions NbS as one of four strategic pillars alongside finance/insurance, technology/data, and community coordination.

Hot Drought Dynamics: Climate scientists have identified an emerging pattern where low precipitation combines with extreme heat to create cascading ecosystem damage and amplified wildfire risk. This hot drought phenomenon, documented across California, Chile, and Central America, necessitates integrated water-fire management strategies rather than siloed approaches.

Resilience KPI	Baseline (Pre-2020)	Current Best Practice	Target (2030)
Wildfire detection time	30+ minutes	<3 minutes (satellite)	<60 seconds (multi-modal)
Flood early warning lead time	6-12 hours	24-72 hours	7+ days (probabilistic)
Insurance claim settlement	60-180 days	3-7 days (parametric)	<24 hours
Mitigation ROI ratio	3:1	4-10:1	>15:1 (targeted)
Community evacuation compliance	40-60%	70-85%	>95%
Post-fire flood risk assessment	2-4 weeks	24-48 hours	Real-time

What's Working

Satellite-AI Integration for Early Detection

The fusion of satellite constellations with machine learning has transformed hazard detection timelines. ICEYE's synthetic aperture radar (SAR) technology enables flood depth monitoring through cloud cover—a critical capability during active storm events when optical satellites are blind. Their December 2024 Series E ($65M) reflects investor confidence in operational scalability.

For wildfires, Pano AI's camera networks combined with computer vision have earned recognition from MIT Technology Review and World Economic Forum Technology Pioneer designations. The multi-modal approach—satellites for broad coverage, ground sensors for early detection, camera networks for precise localization—creates defense-in-depth architectures that significantly reduce response times.

Utility-Grade Predictive Platforms

Sempra's SDG&E subsidiary developed the WiNGS platform integrating AI, real-time weather data, and infrastructure vulnerability mapping to proactively de-energize circuits during extreme fire weather. This Public Safety Power Shutoff (PSPS) optimization reduces both ignition risk and customer impact duration—a critical balance that earlier, blunter approaches failed to achieve.

Similarly, Tetra Tech's RecoveryTrac® system for real-time debris tracking has become standard across FEMA-funded disaster recovery operations, demonstrating how unglamorous logistics optimization can dramatically accelerate community restoration.

Incentive-Aligned Insurance Innovation

The Nature Conservancy's Lake Tahoe pilot program, partnering with Willis Towers Watson, has demonstrated that verified forest treatment can translate directly to insurance premium reductions. Homeowners participating in defensible space creation and structure hardening programs achieved 39% premium reductions while insurers modeled 40-60% loss reduction. This reward-for-resilience model, if scaled, could fundamentally realign private capital toward prevention rather than post-disaster recovery.

What's Not Working

Fragmented Data Ecosystems

Despite advances in individual sensing technologies, interoperability remains a persistent challenge. Flood forecasting systems often cannot ingest wildfire burn scar data that would improve post-fire runoff modeling. Insurance underwriters struggle to access utility vegetation management records that would inform risk pricing. The absence of standardized climate data APIs creates duplicative integration efforts across jurisdictions and sectors.

Equity Gaps in Protection Access

Advanced detection and suppression technologies have primarily deployed in high-value, well-resourced communities. The January 2025 LA wildfires exposed stark disparities: homes in Pacific Palisades with Frontline Wildfire Defense automated sprinkler systems survived while adjacent unprotected properties burned. Scaling these technologies to underserved communities requires financing mechanisms beyond current FEMA and state grant capacity.

Insurance Market Dysfunction

While parametric products show promise for uninsured populations globally, traditional insurance markets in high-risk U.S. regions are contracting rather than adapting. California's FAIR Plan—the insurer of last resort—has become the primary carrier in many fire-prone areas, creating concentrated public sector risk exposure that current funding mechanisms cannot sustain. The $30B+ insured loss estimates from the 2025 LA wildfires will accelerate this market restructuring.

Prescribed Burn Limitations

Despite scientific consensus on fuel load reduction efficacy, prescribed burn programs remain constrained by liability concerns, air quality regulations, and trained workforce shortages. BurnBot's remote-controlled machines represent one pathway to safer, more precise vegetation management, but adoption rates lag the scale required given accumulated fuel loads across Western forests.

Key Players

Established Leaders

Munich Re: The world's largest reinsurer provides foundational climate risk analytics through its NatCatSERVICE database. Their $320B global loss estimate for 2024 establishes industry benchmarks, and their hazard modeling informs pricing across primary insurers worldwide.

WSP: This engineering consultancy derives 30% of North American revenue from climate adaptation projects, including the Texas Ike Dike coastal protection system. Their integration of resilience considerations into core infrastructure design represents the mainstreaming trajectory the industry is following.

Tetra Tech: With $1.2B+ in project backlog including major Texas flood infrastructure, Tetra Tech has established operational expertise in FEMA grant administration and disaster recovery logistics that few competitors match.

Swiss Re: Alongside Munich Re, Swiss Re shapes global catastrophe bond markets and resilience finance innovation. Their Institute publishes influential research on adaptation economics that informs both public policy and private investment.

FEMA: The Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) and Building Resilient Infrastructure & Communities (BRIC) program have allocated $22.4B in mitigation funding since 1996. FEMA's 2018 Disaster Recovery Reform Act expanded eligible activities to include advanced detection systems and nature-based solutions.

Emerging Startups

Floodbase: Their AI platform for parametric flood insurance, leveraging 17 satellite sources, raised $5M in February 2025 to expand coverage in previously uninsurable markets. Claims settlement in days rather than months transforms community recovery dynamics.

OroraTech: The Munich-based company's 8-satellite constellation provides global wildfire monitoring with 3-minute alert capabilities. Their $13.52M Series B (May 2025) from BNP Paribas Solar Impulse validates commercial market traction beyond government contracts.

Seneca: With $60M in Series A funding (October 2025)—the largest fire tech VC round ever—Seneca is developing autonomous firefighting drones for rapid initial attack in conditions too dangerous for human crews. Their San Bernardino County Fire and Aspen Fire Department partnerships demonstrate operational credibility.

ICEYE: The Finnish company's SAR satellite constellation, supported by $65M in Series E funding from BlackRock and Seraphim, enables flood monitoring through cloud cover—a critical capability during active storm events.

Pano AI: MIT Technology Review's recognition and World Economic Forum Technology Pioneer designation validate their AI-powered camera network approach to wildfire detection.

Key Investors & Funders

Convective Capital & Caffeinated Capital: Led Seneca's landmark $60M round, signaling VC appetite for fire tech at scale.

BlackRock: Late-stage climate infrastructure investments including ICEYE position the asset manager as a significant resilience sector player.

Seraphim: The space-focused VC has backed multiple Earth observation companies addressing climate hazards.

Burnt Island Ventures: Water-focused investor behind Floodbase and Previsico, with deep sector expertise.

Texas Flood Infrastructure Fund: State-level commitment of $793M targeting $5B by 2030 represents government willingness to deploy capital at infrastructure scale.

Examples

1. Floodbase: Parametric Insurance for the Uninsured

Floodbase's platform addresses a fundamental gap: the World Bank estimates 1.8 billion people lack access to any form of flood insurance. By using satellite data to trigger automatic payouts when flooding crosses defined thresholds, Floodbase eliminates the claims adjustment bottleneck that delays traditional insurance settlements by months. Their February 2025 funding round from Ecosystem Integrity Fund and Pulse Investment Partners supports expansion across Southeast Asian and African markets where flood frequency is high but insurance penetration minimal. For engineers designing flood infrastructure in emerging markets, Floodbase's API offers risk quantification that can inform project prioritization.

2. Seneca: Autonomous Suppression for Initial Attack

When wildfires ignite in remote terrain or during wind events that ground aircraft, critical minutes pass before human crews can engage. Seneca's autonomous drone platform is designed for exactly these scenarios—rapid initial attack that contains fires before they achieve landscape-scale intensity. Their partnerships with San Bernardino County Fire and Aspen Fire Department provide operational testing environments, while the $60M funding round (October 2025) enables manufacturing scale-up. For utility engineers managing vegetation around transmission corridors, Seneca's technology offers a response layer that complements traditional suppression resources.

3. Lake Tahoe Resilience Pilot: Insurance-Linked Fuel Reduction

The Nature Conservancy and Willis Towers Watson's Lake Tahoe program has demonstrated that verified forest treatment can generate 39% insurance premium reductions while modeling 40-60% loss reduction for participating properties. This blended finance approach—where private insurance incentives fund preventive treatment—represents a potentially scalable model that addresses both insurance market dysfunction and fuel accumulation. The $2.5M policy serves as proof-of-concept for reward-based resilience that could transform how prescribed burns and defensible space programs are financed.

Action Checklist

Conduct a multi-hazard vulnerability assessment integrating flood, drought, and wildfire interactions—particularly post-fire flood risk modeling for burn scar areas within your jurisdiction or asset portfolio
Evaluate detection technology vendors across satellite (OroraTech, ICEYE), ground-based IoT (Dryad Networks), and camera networks (Pano AI) to identify gaps in your current warning capabilities
Review FEMA BRIC and HMGP eligibility for pending mitigation projects; the 2018 Disaster Recovery Reform Act expanded eligible activities to include advanced detection systems and nature-based solutions
Assess parametric insurance options (Floodbase, Swiss Re cat bonds) as supplements to traditional coverage, particularly for critical infrastructure where rapid liquidity post-event is essential
Engage with prescribed burn programs and fuel reduction initiatives; explore BurnBot or similar technologies to scale vegetation management while managing liability concerns
Pilot community engagement platforms that leverage real-time risk data to improve evacuation compliance rates—current best practice achieves 70-85% versus historical 40-60%
Establish data sharing agreements across flood, fire, and water management agencies to enable integrated modeling; advocate for standardized climate data APIs in procurement requirements

FAQ

Q: How should engineers prioritize between detection, prevention, and response investments when budgets are constrained? A: The ROI hierarchy generally favors prevention and early detection over response capacity expansion. Munich Re data indicates $1 in prevention generates $10+ in avoided losses, while NIBS research shows $4 return for wildfire mitigation specifically. However, the optimal allocation depends on existing capability gaps: communities with no early warning infrastructure should prioritize detection, while those with mature warning systems may benefit more from hardening measures. Conduct a gap analysis against the KPI benchmarks in this article, then prioritize investments that move the weakest metric toward best practice thresholds.

Q: What distinguishes legitimate resilience technology vendors from those with limited operational track records? A: Key indicators include: (1) documented deployments with identifiable reference customers willing to speak to performance, not just pilot announcements; (2) third-party validation from organizations like WEF Technology Pioneers, MIT Technology Review, or academic publications; (3) funding from investors with sector expertise (Convective Capital, Burnt Island Ventures) rather than generalist VCs; (4) integration with existing operational workflows rather than standalone solutions requiring parallel infrastructure; and (5) transparent performance metrics including false positive rates for detection systems and actual payout timelines for insurance products.

Q: How can municipalities access resilience funding when they lack dedicated grant-writing capacity? A: Several pathways exist: Tetra Tech and ICF provide fee-based FEMA grant advisory services where fees are often recoverable from awarded grants; state resilience offices increasingly offer technical assistance for BRIC and HMGP applications; and regional planning organizations often have shared resources for smaller jurisdictions. The Texas Flood Infrastructure Fund model—state-level aggregation of local projects—represents another approach where individual municipalities contribute to larger, professionally managed applications.

Q: What metrics should utilities track to demonstrate resilience investment effectiveness to regulators? A: Regulators increasingly expect: (1) avoided outage hours during hazard events compared to counterfactual scenarios; (2) PSPS duration and affected customer reductions for fire utilities; (3) flood infrastructure performance relative to design storms; (4) maintenance cycle adjustments based on asset condition monitoring; and (5) insurance cost trends as a proxy for independent risk assessment. SDG&E's WiNGS platform documentation provides a reference model for the telemetry and analytics infrastructure needed to generate these metrics.

Q: Are nature-based solutions cost-competitive with engineered infrastructure for resilience applications? A: For many applications, NbS demonstrates superior cost-effectiveness. Wetland restoration for flood attenuation typically costs $500-$3,000 per acre versus $10,000+ per linear foot for levee construction. Prescribed burns cost $50-$500 per acre versus $3,000-$10,000 per acre for mechanical fuel reduction. However, NbS approaches require longer planning horizons, different maintenance regimes, and often face regulatory barriers (air quality for prescribed burns, wetlands permitting) that engineered solutions avoid. The optimal portfolio typically combines both approaches, using NbS for broad area risk reduction and engineered solutions for localized critical asset protection.

Sources

NOAA National Centers for Environmental Information. "Billion-Dollar Weather and Climate Disasters." Accessed January 2026. https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/access/billions/
Munich Re. "Climate change is showing its claws: Natural disaster figures 2024." January 2025. https://www.munichre.com/en/company/media-relations/media-information-and-corporate-news/media-information/2025/natural-disaster-figures-2024.html
Climate Central. "2025 in Review: U.S. Billion-Dollar Disasters." January 2026. https://www.climatecentral.org/climate-matters/2025-in-review
World Economic Forum. "From Wildfire Risk to Resilience." Davos, January 2026. https://www.weforum.org/stories/2026/01/investing-wildfire-resilience-forests-markets/
FEMA. "Hazard Mitigation Assistance: Wildfire Mitigation Activities." 2024. https://www.fema.gov/sites/default/files/documents/fema_funded-wildfire-mitigation-activities.pdf
PwC. "State of Climate Tech 2024." October 2024. https://www.pwc.com/gx/en/issues/esg/climate-tech-investment-adaptation-ai.html
McKinsey & Company. "Climate resilience technology: An inflection point for new investment." 2025. https://www.mckinsey.com/capabilities/sustainability/our-insights/climate-resilience-technology-an-inflection-point-for-new-investment
National Institute of Building Sciences. "Natural Hazard Mitigation Saves." 2019. Multi-hazard mitigation ROI analysis.