You’re caught by the ocean’s riptide, exhausted and barely keeping your head above water. Then your unlikely hero appears: a four-foot-long talking buoy. It’s EMILY, the robot lifeguard. Grab on, and it can bring you safely back to shore.
This summer, EMILY (for EMergency Integrated Lifesaving lanYard) began patrolling Malibu’s dangerous Zuma Beach and will watch over about 25 more by December. Although lifeguards operate this version by remote control, next year’s model will autonomously save potential drowning victims as reliably as a human. Once a lifeguard tosses EMILY into the surf, its sonar device will scan for the underwater movements associated with swimmers in distress. Its electric, Jet Ski–like impeller drives it at 28 mph through even the roughest chop, getting a flotation device—itself—to victims six times as fast as a lifeguard would. The ’bot’s camera and speakers will let an onshore lifeguard calm the person and instruct him to wait for human help or to hold on as EMILY ferries him back.
The autonomous version will go on sale next spring for $3,500, says Tony Mulligan, CEO of Hydronalix, the Arizona company developing the ’bot, and will work alongside human lifeguards. “Most lifeguards have spent their life in the ocean, learning how it acts. You can’t give that experience to a computer,” says Brandon Chapman, a Zuma beach lifeguard who tested EMILY. “But I don’t have sonar. If I was out at sea, I would be pretty stoked if EMILY showed up.”
1 Ready for action
EMILY patrols solo or is thrown into the sea from the beach, a helicopter or a ship.

2 Search and rescue
EMILY’s sonar finds a distressed swimmer, and it jets toward him at 28 mph.

3 Mission accomplished
A swimmer holds onto EMILY as it gently brings him to shore or waits for a lifeguard. The robot can travel up to 80 miles on a single battery charge.

Five amazing, clean technologies that will set us free, in this month's energy-focused issue. Also: how to build a better bomb detector, the robotic toys that are raising your children, a human catapult, the world's smallest arcade, and much more.


Online Content Director: Suzanne LaBarre | Email
Senior Editor: Paul Adams | Email
Associate Editor: Dan Nosowitz | Email
Assistant Editor: Colin Lecher | Email
Assistant Editor: Rose Pastore | Email
Contributing Writers:
Rebecca Boyle | Email
Kelsey D. Atherton | Email
Francie Diep | Email
Shaunacy Ferro | Email
I am curious if it has been tested in large crowded beaches. Then also if the government, or private beaches will see this device as a toll bridge that requires payment for use. Not to say your life may or may not be worth it. I am just calling out the next 100$ pain pill bot.
...you need a ride? reply yes, please swipe your credit card, or provide your social security card.
no twobrain.
ut more importantly this is a shitty lifeguard, if you get stuck in a undertow/riptide w/e its called and your underwater, your not going to be able to grab on, you will need the life guard to be able to go underwater to get you
Sure beats nothing, nizeke. Riptides don't pull you underwater.
doesnt beat a lifeguard
Yeah man. I have a feeling that these would be way more useful then not. I don't know if you've ever been caught in a riptide but it sucks. Your only option is to swim along the coastline until you stop getting sucked out to sea. Then you have to swim back to shore. Believe me when I say that if you aren't a good swimmer or if you try swimming directly back to shore, you are going to gas out and drown.
I would put a solar panel on the back of these and have multiple life guard bots waiting along a busy shoreline, looking for people who are out to far or thrashing.
It definitely couldn't hurt.
28mph!? So the victim will go from panic to relief to panic again as the thing makes a high speed beeline for them. Hopefully when it is autonomous it will be able to be a little more gentle
what's with the skeptisism? for once autonomous devices are used to save life (or at least help to do so) and not to kill, maim and destroy.
Is it perfect? not at all!
does it beat a lifeguard? no!
We're talking lifesaving here, a matter with hundreds of variables, I don't think it's all that wrong to try to even the odds. It can reach the victim 6 times faster than a human lifeguard and buy precious time.
and to all of you who don't get it...we can always mount a machine gun on top so it can take out foreign belligerant swimmers at the flip a switch.
what's with the skepticism? for once autonomous devices are used to save life (or at least help to do so) and not to kill, maim and destroy.
Is it perfect? not at all!
does it beat a lifeguard? no!
We're talking lifesaving here, a matter with hundreds of variables, I don't think it's all that wrong to try to even the odds. It can reach the victim 6 times faster than a human lifeguard and buy precious time.
and to all of you who don't get it...we can always mount a machine gun on top so it can take out foreign belligerant swimmers at the flip of a switch.
Swim with caution, stay safe.
I like dipap's latter option, sounds awesome! :p
But really, sounds like a good idea to me for someone who is very far out and hard to reach without tiring the life guard out as well. It would zoom out at 28mph, wait till the person was on hold, then come back at whatever pace would be safe for the swimmer. I'm sure it wouldn't be 0-28mph in three seconds like cjeam is apparently thinking. Slow acceleration, slow return.
On the news interview, the newscaster announced that EMILY can tow the person to a waiting lifeguard boat if need be. EMILY gets there first and the person holds on, then when the lifeguards arrive, they can pull the person to safety if need be. Speed is essential as is "location". When EMILY finds the person, it can maintain it's position in case the person goes below the surface.
i hate tossin out great ideas for free. but here we go again.... what if it flew or hovered out and landed in the water gently move toward victim and then "swam" back to shore towing the victim.
I agree it won't help for those who go under but I presume this is to prevent the drowning person from also drowning the life-gaurd which happens all too often. For the other cases, I presume they still get a human rescuer.
Maybe they can add some barbed fish hooks to pull in those that go under. ;) (Just kidding!)
Still, hopefully it'll save some lives.
EMILY Lifeguards rescued 77,192 people at U.S. beaches in 2009
Really? 77,000 people would have drowned in 2009 without it?
That sounds like a serious problem.