Compare land and logistics on one map.
A geospatial decision platform that combines multicriteria site analysis with cost modelling. Teams compare complex scenarios side by side, from carbonizer sites to data centers, with every assumption traceable to its source and access set by role.
Where to build, and whether it beats current practice.
Each figure traces to its source: route distances, vehicle factors, and the site inputs your team approved.
Figure 1 shows a dot map of Northern California from real geometry. Seven candidate sites for a mobile carbonizer appear as rings. The selected site is gold, and a dotted route runs from it to a disposal point, shown as a square. Transport footprint: carbonizing at the selected site means 326.3 miles driven and 0.5 t of transport CO₂e. Hauling the same material to disposal means 1,384.9 miles and 2 t. Carbonizing at this site saves 1,059 miles and 1.50 t CO₂e.
Four criteria, one answer.
Figure 2 uses illustrative inputs. Four small dot maps of Northern California show one criterion each: slope under 15%, road access, fire-risk buffer, and feedstock within 5 miles. They merge into one large combined suitability map. The score of each cell is the weighted mean of the four criteria. Larger, darker dots are more suitable, the top 5% of cells are gold as a shortlist, and protected or too-steep ground is excluded and drawn as grey rings. The default weights are slope 5, road access 7, fire-risk buffer 6 and feedstock 8, each adjustable from 0 to 10.
A data-driven dot animation, drawn to scale from the treatment-effect data in Brodie et al. 2024. The 2021 Antelope Fire reaches two stands. In the untreated stand, dense with low crowns, fire climbs from the ground into the crowns and the burned trees fall to ash grey. In the thinned and burned stand, treated 20 and 10 years earlier, fire stays on the ground and the crowns survive. Thinned and burned stands had a 60 point lower probability of tree mortality and 86 points less crown volume consumed.
Preventing catastrophic wildfires.
Same method, any siting question. Including data centers.
Multicriteria analysis + cost modelEvery answer shows its work.
Multicriteria site analysis
Weigh terrain, access, risk, and feedstock together, then see how the ranking moves when priorities change.
Cost modelling
Each scenario carries its own cost model, compared directly against current practice.
Traceable assumptions
Every number links to the dataset, rate card, or study it came from.
Role-based access
Planners, analysts, reviewers, and sub-contractors each contribute data at their own permission level. Every tenant sees only what it is allowed to see, and nothing more is shared.