Stop the spread
THE QUESTION
Can drones deploy a nano-biogel fire retardant to stop the spread of wildfires in Brazil’s forests?
LOCATION: Brazil
SECTOR: Nature and Biodiversity
TECH: Biotech, Drones/UAVs
TIMELINE: September 2024 - Present
PIONEER: Laura Moreira
PARTNERS: ArqueaTEC
The Challenge
Wildfires in Brazil are becoming more frequent and intense, posing a growing threat to human health, biodiversity, and economies. A UNEP study identified prolonged droughts, rising temperatures, dry lightning and stronger winds as just some of the exacerbating factors brought about by climate change. Furthermore, annual carbon dioxide emissions from Brazil’s wildfires are equal to those of the European Union.
Traditional firefighting methods, which rely on large amounts of water and chemical retardants, are expensive and often harmful to the environment. There is an urgent need for innovative, eco-friendly, and cost-effective solutions to combat wildfires.
The Idea
This pilot aims to test the deployment of nano-biogel, a fire retardant combining nanoscale materials and biogel technology. This innovative substance is designed to:
Reduce water use: The nanomaterials enhance fire suppression efficiency, requiring less water than traditional methods.
Minimise environmental impact: The biocompatible gel matrix prevents ecological harm, making it safer for forests and wildlife.
To deploy the nano-biogel, drones will fly over fire-prone areas and release the substance, alongside ground-based methods, such as backpack sprayers and tanker trucks.
If successful, this solution could provide a scalable, eco-friendly alternative to traditional firefighting, with the potential to be replicated in wildfire-prone regions worldwide.
Hear more about the idea in this short video:
What Happened
During this pilot, the FT Hub and partners set out to test whether combining nanobiogel fire‑retardant technology with existing aerial and ground‑based application methods could offer a viable, scalable way to prevent and contain wildfires in Brazil.
The work began by testing a central technical question: whether nanobiogel could be effectively and safely deployed using drones under Brazilian operational conditions. Early experiments showed that the product was compatible with widely available crop‑spraying drones and did not clog pumps, confirming that no bespoke hardware would be required. However, testing also revealed that drone application was not suited to active firefighting. Instead, the technology proved most effective as a preventive or early‑stage suppression tool, applied ahead of peak risk periods or to slow fire spread at the edges of emerging incidents. This shifted the focus of the pilot from emergency response to prevention and containment.
As testing progressed, the team concentrated on optimising the product itself. Controlled field experiments compared different concentrations and application timings, demonstrating that a 1:1 nanobiogel dilution consistently delivered the best balance between suppression performance, persistence, environmental safety, and operational practicality. This concentration was shown to achieve up to 85% fire containment while reducing water consumption by as much as 63% compared to traditional methods. Crucially, the gel remained effective for up to 24 hours after application, opening the door to pre‑treatment strategies rather than last‑minute intervention.
Alongside this technical work, the pilot explored how application methods affected cost and feasibility. Drone trials demonstrated that performance was highly sensitive to flight height, speed and flow rate, with small deviations creating coverage gaps that fire could breach. While drones could be cost‑effective at scale and in hard‑to‑reach terrain, field trials with small farmers revealed a different reality: where water trucks and ground equipment already existed, ground‑based application was simpler, cheaper, and more attractive than drone deployment. This led to a significant pivot away from a drone‑centric solution towards a more flexible, context‑specific model in which drones are one tool among several, rather than the core offering. The trials clarified that while ground-based application leverages existing infrastructure on farms, drones remain the strategic choice for remote areas and hard-to-reach terrain where water logistics are the primary bottleneck.
In parallel, the team tested market assumptions around adoption and willingness to pay. Interviews and surveys with farmers and drone operators showed recognition of the problem and high perceived value of the solution, particularly its water efficiency and preventive benefits. However, immediate willingness to pay was lower than expected and closely linked to uncertainty about return on investment. This highlighted that the main barrier to uptake was not trust in the technology but the absence of clear, quantified economic evidence. Interviews revealed that for many users, the perceived value is directly tied to the ‘water-saving’ factor, yet widespread adoption still requires a documented Return on Investment (ROI) to justify shifting from a reactive to a preventive budget."
The later stages of the pilot moved from controlled experiments to real‑world validation, which was coupled with a visit to Brazil by the FT Hub team to work more closely with the partner. A small‑scale test on a sugarcane farm provided a decisive proof point when a treated area successfully contained a fire while an adjacent untreated plot burned uncontrollably. The farmer not only converted into a paying customer but became an active advocate, generating national media exposure. This marked a shift from technical validation to early commercial traction and reinforced the importance of visible, real‑world proof.
At the institutional level, engagements with fire departments, environmental agencies, cooperatives and producer associations showed that institutional trust followed operational evidence. Fire department involvement and visual documentation proved critical in opening doors to public actors, while cooperatives and sectoral associations emerged as the most credible channels for reaching large numbers of producers and enabling collective or subsidised access. The pilot also surfaced unexpected interest from industrial and infrastructure actors, specifically within the energy sector, suggesting a parallel pathway where fire prevention is framed as risk protection for high‑value assets.
Overall, the pilot demonstrated that nanobiogel‑based fire prevention is technically viable and environmentally sound, but that its path to scale depends on adapting the delivery model to local realities. The work moved the solution away from a single high‑tech deployment model towards a pragmatic, evidence‑led approach centred on prevention, existing infrastructure, and trusted intermediaries. By the end of the pilot, the focus had shifted from proving that the technology works to proving where, for whom, and under what conditions it makes economic and institutional sense to deploy it at scale.
Our learnings and stories so far
This pilot hasn’t started to publish yet, but there are plenty of other blogs to read below. Check back soon!
Explore related pilots
Curious about how frontier technologies are providing support for nature and biodiversity efforts? Read below to find out about our other pilots in these sectors. 👇🏽
