6 Ways NOAA Budget Cuts Will Impact Weather Reporting
By Scott Weaver
At a time when storms are getting more destructive, floods more devastating and people and property more vulnerable, accurate weather forecasting is more critical than ever.
Which is why the Trump administration's brazen proposal to slash funding for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA) most important forecasting and storm prediction programs has set off alarms in recent days. In all, the president wants to slash the agency's budget by 16 percent.
Having spent more than six years as a NOAA scientist, I know there are ways to become more efficient and make government work better. Many dedicated professionals within the agency would be eager to partner with the administration to develop that kind of action plan.
Except, efficiency is not what this proposal is about. Rather, it blatantly disregards science and how it protects lives and property.
Here are a few of the NOAA budget lowlights, and why they could matter to you:
1. Delays Hurricane Forecast Improvements
Several NOAA programs are developing advanced modeling to make weather and storm forecasts more accurate and reliable. But the same week NOAA called for an above-average season of hurricane activity, the Trump administration requested a $5 million funding cut for these important programs.
It would slow the transition of such advanced forecasting models into real-life warning systems—directly affecting families and business owners who must prepare for severe storms. It would also make the accuracy of American weather forecasts fall farther behind its European and Japanese peers.
2. Eliminates Critical Tornado Warning Program
Vortex-Southeast—a $5 million program used to detect, respond to and warn against tornadoes in Southeastern U.S.—would be terminated. The program studies the intensity and path of twisters in a region with more tornado deaths than any other and how to best communicate forecasts to the public.
3. Terminates Arctic Research Protecting Fishermen
The president wants to cut a total of $6 million from two NOAA programs that support improvements to sea ice modeling and predictions, along with a program that models vulnerabilities among ecosystems and fisheries.
These programs, among other things, help predict where potentially hazardous floating sea ice may be present, supporting the safety and business of fishermen, commercial shippers, cruise ships and local communities in Alaska.
4. Closes Lab Tracking Mercury Pollution, Fallout
NOAA's Air Resources Laboratory researches how mercury and other harmful materials travel through the atmosphere and fall to Earth. The lab's models also help emergency agencies and the aviation industry minimize and respond to pollution disasters such as radioactive fallout or anthrax attacks.
And yet, the administration has requested a $4.7 million decrease to close the entire lab.
5. Slows Flood Forecasting Improvements
A $3.1 million cut would slow upgrades to the National Water Model, an initiative hailed as a "game changer" for flood prediction when it launched in 2016. The model offers hourly forecasts for the nation's entire river network—information that helps emergency agencies, farmers, barge operators and others respond faster and more efficiently to floods.
6. Scales Back Forecasts of El Niño
A $26 million cut targets programs that monitor the tropical Pacific Ocean and help forecasters predict El Niño and other global environmental weather patterns. Such cuts would make it much harder to anticipate short-term climate events such as drought, excessive flooding and other extreme weather.
These are just a few of the highlights of the administration's proposed budget for NOAA, but should give you an idea of just how severe they are. These program cuts are not in America's best interest.
The European Commission, the European Union's executive arm, announced Tuesday it has opened an in-depth investigation into Bayer's proposed $66 billion takeover of Monsanto over "concerns that the merger may reduce competition in areas such as pesticides, seeds and traits."
The controversial merger, if successful, will form the world's largest integrated seed and pesticide company.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) administrator Scott Pruitt appears in a video sponsored by the beef industry calling on farmers and ranchers to file official comments on a proposal to withdraw and rewrite the Obama-era "Waters of the United States" rule (or WOTUS) before the Aug. 28 deadline.
The National Cattlemen's Beef Association (NCBA) video was produced by the beef lobbying organization's policy division, Beltway Beef and was released last week. Notably, NCBA spent $117,375 in lobbying last year.
Two years ago, Stanford University professor Mark Jacobson and his collaborators published a widely circulated study that detailed how the U.S. can eliminate nuclear, biofuels and fossil fuels and transition to 100 percent renewable energy by 2050.
Now, in a paper published Wednesday in the new scientific journal Joule, Jacobson and 26 co-authors created clean energy roadmaps not just for the 50 United States, but for 139 individual countries.
The effects of climate change is inextricably linked to human health. The burning of fossil fuels releases carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases that traps heat in the atmosphere, causing global temperatures to spike, air quality to worsen, all while fueling droughts, floods and storms that impact food and water security.
By Steve Horn
Energy Transfer Partners, owner of the Dakota Access pipeline, has filed a $300 million Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) lawsuit against Greenpeace and other environmental groups for their activism against the long-contested North Dakota-to-Illinois project.
In its 187-page complaint, Energy Transfer alleges that "putative not-for-profits and rogue eco-terrorist groups who employ patterns of criminal activity and campaigns of misinformation to target legitimate companies and industries with fabricated environmental claims and other purported misconduct" caused the company to lose "billions of dollars."
In a study published Tuesday in the journal Environmental Research Letters, Harvard postdoctoral fellow Geoffrey Supran and professor Naomi Oreskes reviewed nearly 200 communications on climate change from the oil giant, including scientific research, internal company memos and paid editorial features in the New York Times.
The U.S. District Court of Appeals ruled 2-1 Tuesday saying that the Federal Environmental Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) failed to adequately review the environmental impacts of the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions of the fracked gas Sabal Trail pipeline, which runs more than 500 miles through Alabama, Georgia and Florida.
As ocean waters warm and acidify, corals across the globe are disappearing. Desperate to prevent the demise of these vital ecosystems, researchers have developed ways to "garden" corals, buying the oceans some much-needed time. University of Miami Rosenstiel School marine biologist Diego Lirman sat down with Josh Chamot of Nexus Media to describe the process and explain what's at stake. This interview has been edited for length and clarity.