CQ WEEKLY – VANTAGE POINT
May 28, 2011 – 4:48 p.m.
A Hazier Forecast for Funding of NOAA Satellites
By Shawn Zeller, CQ Staff
The death toll from the tornadoes in the Midwest last week could have been higher, meteorologists say, but for the forecasts developed with the help of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s polar orbiting satellites and the time they allow for people to get out of the way.
|
||
|
That lead time is at risk, the meteorologists say, because of Congress’ decision during the fiscal 2011 budget debate this spring to flat-line funding for the next generation of satellites. Instead of the agency getting the more than $1 billion it says it needs, Congress gave it $382 million.
The satellites are crucial to giving accurate near-term forecasts and reliable long-term forecasts as much as a week out. They don’t allow for perfect predictions about tornadoes or other severe weather, of course, but they let forecasters narrow the possibilities significantly.
“It doesn’t help to just have a warning about tornadoes or hurricanes or winter storms just a few hours before they happen,” says William H. Hooke, senior policy director at the American Meteorological Society, a professional group made up of 14,000 meteorologists and weather enthusiasts. “If you want to mobilize emergency managers and first-responders, you need a lead time of several days.”
|
||
|
The fight over funding is continuing. President Obama in February called for full funding for the satellites. The House GOP budget sponsored by Wisconsin’s
The next-generation satellites are supposed to push out forecast accuracy to 10 days from seven. But NOAA officials say they will be delayed at least a year, from 2014 to 2015, because of the 2011 funding decision. Plus, since the existing satellites are expected to wear out from the effects of radiation and atmospheric drag, forecasts could actually get worse during that period.
NOAA would still have satellites that orbit around the equator but would lose the north-south coverage the polar satellites provide. As a result, forecasting would be possible only three to five days in advance and wouldn’t be as accurate, according to NOAA officials.
For example, NOAA ran weather data for the huge February 2010 snowstorm that hit Washington, D.C., and found that without the polar satellites, forecast models indicated at least 10 fewer inches of snow falling than the two-plus feet that actually did. That would have left residents unprepared for the record-setting storm.
“It’s a tough appropriations year, so we hope that every member of Congress takes this seriously,” says Christine McEntee, executive director of the American Geophysical Union, a Washington group that represents geophysicists. “This is absolutely essential for public safety.”
The satellites in question are part of NOAA’s Joint Polar Satellite System. They make regular orbits around the Earth’s poles from 517 miles above ground, taking pictures as they go, giving meteorologists the clearest view available of worldwide weather trends.
Last month, six Senate Democrats, led by
A Hazier Forecast for Funding of NOAA Satellites
The National Weather Service Employees Organization, the agency’s union, has weighed in as well. “Hopefully the recent weather events in the Midwest will help highlight what will happen” without the polar satellites, says the group’s president, Dan Sobien. “Being able to give people weather watches and heads-up that conditions are favorable for tornadoes won’t be there” if the satellites aren’t funded.
Not everyone agrees. Conservative commentators have long targeted NOAA’s National Weather Service as ripe for privatization. “I feel quite confident in saying there is market demand for weather forecasting,” says Daniel J. Mitchell, a senior fellow at the Cato Institute, a libertarian group. “I can’t imagine with all the satellites that go up in space that if the Weather Service went away someone wouldn’t swoop in and do it much more efficiently and at much less cost than the government.”