The proposed closure of three NOAA facilities has raised serious concerns among scientific and business communities, highlighting the potential negative impacts on weather forecasting, public safety, and the economy. Industry leaders urge the administration to prioritize NOAA funding, asserting it is essential for effective disaster response and economic activity.
Concerns have arisen over the potential closure of three critical federal buildings essential for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) weather forecasts and hazard warnings. Various scientific and business groups are urging the administration to reconsider these cuts, citing potential negative impacts on the economy and public safety. A list by the General Services Administration (GSA) previously included a NOAA satellite operations facility in Maryland, although it has since been removed from the website.
The threatened closures raise apprehensions among meteorologists, climate scientists, and private sector entities reliant on NOAA’s data and observations. Many representatives from the insurance, agriculture, and fishing industries have reached out to Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, advocating for the protection of NOAA and its vital programs through private communications and public appeals.
The Reinsurance Association of America emphasized in a letter to The Washington Post that federal funding for NOAA is a wise investment. They urged the administration to safeguard NOAA’s capabilities in collecting and disseminating data that informs about significant storm events and the escalating frequency of billion-dollar disasters impacting the United States.
Frank Nutter, president of the Reinsurance Association, stated, “Perhaps no other federal entity facilitates greater economic and commercial activity than NOAA and its data sources.” The operational facilities face potential cuts, affecting vital tornado and weather hazard warnings and the management of the national Doppler radar system and satellite data collection.
Florence Rabier, a prominent figure at the European Center for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts, remarked that any interruption in Earth system monitoring could lead to extensive, long-lasting repercussions. She called for enhanced scientific collaboration between the U.S. and member countries for mutual benefits.
The lists of possible lease terminations, first disclosed by media outlets, align with broader efforts by the Trump administration to reduce governmental expenditures, aiming to save taxpayers money. The GSA has reported costs exceeding $430 million associated with noncore facilities lacking sufficient operational value.
In the wake of these proposed actions, the American Geophysical Union and the American Meteorological Society warned about the risks of federal disinvestment in weather and climate science, arguing that it could have detrimental effects on public safety and numerous industries. They emphasized the significant economic activity, exceeding $100 billion, supported by government weather and climate data.
Meteorologist Brad Panovich underscored the severity of the situation, expressing concerns that these closures could lead to dire economic consequences, stating, “This will literally bankrupt the U.S.” Additionally, a coalition of 170 fishing organizations has implored the administration to ensure continued access to crucial weather data.
Concerns regarding agricultural yields and water management were echoed by officials from the University of Georgia Extension, who warned against the loss of valuable weather data. The Center for Weather and Climate Prediction, a pivotal NOAA facility in Maryland, has been flagged for potential lease termination despite its critical role in weather forecasting.
Simultaneously, the Radar Operations Center in Oklahoma is vital for maintaining the 122 Doppler radar systems nationwide, with a lease cancellation reported to yield substantial savings for the government. However, the NOAA Satellite Operations Facility in Maryland, which oversees crucial equipment like the Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellites (GOES), was also identified as a noncore property in GSA comparisons.
The possibility of these closures raises significant questions among scientists about the future of government data collection, their analysis, and dissemination. Andrew Rosenberg, a former NOAA official, expressed concern regarding the implications for public service and data delivery to American citizens, questioning whether the government would cease such essential activities.
The looming closures of NOAA facilities pose serious risks to weather forecasting and public safety. Leading industry representatives and scientific organizations have expressed concern over the substantial economic and societal impacts such cuts may incur. Investment in NOAA is seen as pivotal for safeguarding economic stability and facilitating vital services across several sectors. With the potential for significant disruptions to data collection and analysis, stakeholders are urging the administration to reevaluate their stance on funding these critical operations.
Original Source: www.washingtonpost.com
