From MSE Creative Consulting
Guest post by Mike Smith
I wish to provide President-elect Trump with recommendations regarding NOAA and the National Weather Service (NWS) as significant changes are needed in the future. Some types of NWS forecasts are getting less In terms of accuracy, the quality of our weather computer models has dropped to fourth place.
While the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) may have seemed like a good idea in 1970, it was actually a disaster for meteorology. There hasn’t been a weather-oriented administrator in 50 years (!). The current administrator has shown zero interest in the National Weather Service's problems and left it starved of resources. When President Trump tried to appoint a weather-focused administrator during his first term, he was undermined by ocean interests (and some anti-Trump figures) who didn’t want their turf damaged.
Worse yet, NOAA has succumbed to global warming publicity Its products are also tainted by this stance. For example, the “billion dollar disaster” was nothing more than propaganda (cf. here and here). As Congress shows interest in funding the National Weather Service's much-needed radar gap fill, NOAA makes a surprising move No.
It is time to disband NOAA. I don't have enough expertise to offer advice on what to do with the marine part of the agency other than to say “good riddance”.
For weather and climate,
- National Weather Service,
- NESDIS (National Environmental Data and Information Service; operates satellites and other data collection sources and then makes the data available to anyone who needs it),
- ·NOAA laboratories, such as the National Severe Storms Laboratory,
- Maybe it's the government's drought plan,
Should become a new independent agency (call it, um, “the Weather Bureau”?) that by law is divorced from the global warming business.
Make no mistake: the new agency’s data should be world-class. If the data supports a rapid rise in temperature, that's fine. But today's NOAA gives out $10 million in grants for “environmental education” and other “progressive” nonsense to irresponsible “nonprofit organizations” that, not coincidentally, always Stand with global warming advocates. Regardless of whether NOAA is disbanded, this needs to stop because of the inherent conflict of interest with scientific ethics. Meanwhile, the National Weather Service is so starved of funds that it can't even launch regular weather balloons everywhere it's needed. Ten million dollars could alleviate this problem.
The Weather Bureau (I partly joke about the name) should be an independent federal agency like NASA. It should support the weather needs of other federal agencies (i.e., the National Forest Service fighting forest fires) and the needs of the public at large. Serving special interests should be prohibited by law. Practical examples,
- Build a weekly updated website for a college football team.
- Format data for specific users (e.g. wind energy industry).
- Sending meteorologists to NASCAR races (especially during tornado watches, manpower is needed to serve the public).
The Bureau of Meteorology shall provide 100% of the data in the most timely manner possible and in a standardized data format.
The service should have enough funding to install new radars across the country (including gap fillers), purchase all (not just some) of the aircraft and private sector satellite weather data, add additional weather balloon stations (including at least two on abandoned bays) automated stations) oil platforms) and operate balloon stations that are currently out of service, etc. Sufficient funding should be available to conduct weather measurement flights when needed (Pacific atmospheric rivers, hurricanes, winter storms). The “non-locally made” NWS culture must be eradicated. As others have pointed out, The National Weather Service is Thirty years behind Some aspects of weather forecasting.
Proportionally speaking, more technicians than meteorologists may be needed in the future. and, training of current and future meteorologists must Complete change. One goal is that when computer forecasts are clearly wrong, meteorologists should be able to step in and change them. But, as aviation safety knows all too well, it’s impossible to override flawed automated output when people have little or no experience.
To use an analogy: Why did Asiana Airlines Flight 214 crash while flying to San Francisco International Airport in clear weather in 2013? because pilot Never attempted to fly a 777 manually during landing (i.e. without automation)! Three people died, 180 were injured, and a $440 million jumbo jet was destroyed. This is very similar to meteorologists accurately intervening when models appear to be seriously off. How do we expect them to make independent (model) predictions when they have no experience doing so?
Human factors in weather forecasting are not sufficiently studied. All that has been done (mostly by Dr. Tom Stewart) raises a serious question: More models give meteorologists more confidence, but They do not improve accuracy! However, despite this finding, the National Weather Service continues to increase the number of models available to its forecasters.
My suggestion is that the Bureau of Meteorology establish an advanced forecasting school to teach and provide experience in extreme weather forecasting over a period of about 4-6 weeks no model Give it to the team. And it should be done soon, before the generation of meteorologists who knew how to make such predictions dies.
NWS employee union agrees accuracy of forecasts and warnings could improve no Use when a meteorologist is being considered for promotion or when immediate closure is required as part of the annual forecast review! After 35 years in the commercial weather forecasting and warning business, I would also:
- Like Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) air traffic controllers, the National Weather Service's (NWS) job is to save lives. The salaries they are paid for these functions should reflect this responsibility and civil service rules should be modified accordingly.
- Stop the shift. Ask volunteers to work shifts during off-hours (pay a little extra). Everyone hates working shifts, and studies show they shorten lifespan. Some people like to work at night. Let them. However, if there are not enough volunteers, meteorologists can be assigned to work at night for six months at a time. Studies show this is healthier than spinning.
- Teach those who manage the NWS workforce real management skills, not DEI. DEI should be removed immediately.
The Meteorological Bureau should stop doing the old weather modeling. The past 30 years have proven that the agency is terrible at this, and the agency will get better models faster by relying on outside groups like the National Center for Atmospheric Research. However, There should be a team of line forecasters setting targets for the new model. Now, as meteorologists get used to a new set of models, another modification emerges, requiring forecasters to go back to square one. Better predictions for the masses will come from approaches that make better use of existing models (artificial intelligence, human technology, etc.) rather than making frequent small tweaks to the models themselves.
Some want a reorganization of the National Weather Service that would result in significantly fewer forecasters and more specialized forecast centers. Because I don’t know the details, I dare not comment. However, my gut tells me that this is probably not a good idea. Let's try to optimize what we have instead of tearing everything down again (like in the 1990s).
Finally, the legislation needed to dismantle NOAA and establish the Weather Service should include my proposal National Disaster Review Board (NDRB). In addition to studying natural disaster forecasting and response and publishing reports on best practices and issues, the NDC will independently maintain statistics on the accuracy of the Bureau of Meteorology's storm forecasts and warnings. The National Development and Reform Commission and the Meteorological Administration are complementary and indispensable to each other.
There is a real opportunity here to improve weather forecasts and storm warnings. Not only do storm warnings save lives, research conclusively proves that better forecasts have huge economic value. Money invested in the “new” Weather Bureau will be returned dozens of times.
Relevant
