Use-Case: Energy Transmission Lines

Mersin, Türkiye

Executive summary

Wildfire risk along energy transmission lines is shaped by three hard realities: long distances measured in kilometers, inconsistent vegetation maintenance, and the practical impossibility of watching every corridor continuously. Cameras require line of sight and dense infrastructure, satellites provide broad coverage but are not a real-time monitoring tool because imagery availability and processing often introduce delays, and drones cannot be operated 24/7 at scale. Meanwhile, even a small ignition can escalate into outages, safety incidents, and costly repairs.

To address this gap, ForestGuard conducted a six-month proof of concept in Mersin, in the southeastern Mediterranean region of Türkiye. The climate and vegetation profile are comparable to many Mediterranean transmission corridors. The PoC focused on early-stage detection before flame visibility, and on producing operationally usable risk states that guide field teams toward the right locations at the right time.

In a single day, ForestGuard deployed and activated 10 sensors covering almost 30 hectares at critical points along the corridor. Over the six-month PoC, the system detected 4 direct fire cases and, during this period, the operations team reported no false alarms. The risk workflow also demonstrated a clear escalation funnel: more than 500 low-risk detections, 112 medium-risk detections, 24 high-risk detections, and 4 cases that escalated to the highest risk state.

1) The problem we targeted

Transmission lines create a unique monitoring challenge:

• The protected asset is linear and vast, often stretching across mountains, valleys, forest interfaces, and agricultural boundaries.

• Vegetation maintenance is uneven, and risk accumulates quietly in corridors where trimming cycles lag behind seasonal growth.

• Camera networks are expensive to install and maintain across rugged terrain, and they cannot “see” behind ridgelines or into blind spots.

• Satellite monitoring supports situational awareness, but it is not built for second-by-second operational response because revisit timing, cloud cover, and processing workflows can delay actionable signals.

• Drones are valuable for inspections, but they are not feasible for continuous, round-the-clock detection across large networks.

• Fires near lines can trigger outages, forced shutdowns, emergency dispatch, and cascading operational impacts.

The PoC objective was to prove that a distributed sensing layer can cover the blind spots, detect early-stage conditions before visible flame, and convert environmental signals into a practical escalation workflow.

2) Deployment approach and footprint

ForestGuard deployed 10 sensors, installed and activated on the same day. Coverage focused on almost 30 hectares at critical points rather than attempting uniform coverage everywhere. This is consistent with how transmission line protection works in practice. The goal is to secure the high-consequence segments first, such as:

• wind corridors and valley channels where ignition spreads faster

• interface zones with dense vegetation near towers

• hard-to-access blind spots where cameras are ineffective

• known ignition-prone areas based on historical incidents and field knowledge

The PoC proved that rapid deployment is realistic for corridor protection when placement is driven by risk mapping and operational needs.

3) Operational concept, how alerts became decisions

The PoC used a tiered risk logic designed to help grid operators act without overwhelming teams:

• Low risk: early anomaly signals, used to build awareness and trend monitoring

• Medium risk: more persistent or correlated signals, triggers closer attention

• High risk: actionable escalation, triggers targeted patrol or readiness actions

• Direct Fire case: confirmed early-stage fire detection event

The key was not the volume of signals, but the escalation funnel that filters attention and prevents alert fatigue.

4) Results from the six-month PoC

During the PoC, ForestGuard detected:

• 500+ low-risk cases, roughly several per day depending on conditions (Only 112 of these escalated into medium risk)

• 112 medium-risk cases, roughly around one per day (Only 24 of these escalated into high risk)

• 24 high-risk cases (Only 4 escalated into the highest risk state)

• Direct fire cases: 4 direct fire cases detected during the PoC period (No false alarms were reported by the operations team during the PoC)

This funnel matters operationally. It shows that the system does not treat every weak signal as an emergency. Most low-risk signals do not escalate, and even among medium and high events, only a small fraction reach the most urgent level.

5) What this PoC demonstrated for transmission-line protection

1. A practical way to secure kilometers of corridor You do not need cameras everywhere. A sensor layer placed on critical points can close blind spots and provide early warning where visibility and infrastructure are limited.

2. A tiered risk workflow that supports operations The PoC validated that risk staging can guide dispatch and readiness without flooding teams with high-severity alarms.

3. Fast deployment is feasible Deploying and activating 10 sensors in one day demonstrates a realistic pathway to scale, starting with the highest-risk segments, then expanding.

4. 4) Real operational outcomes, not just monitoring Fire cases and escalating risk states translate directly to actions: targeted patrol, localized readiness, faster response, and reduced chance of outages.