THAT EXPERIMENT WAS DONE IN AN ERA WHEN THE INSTRUMENTS AND
OBSERVING TOOLS AVAILABLE FOR RESEARCH WERE CRUDE TO SAY THE
LEAST, WHEN COMPARED TO OUR MODERN AIRCRAFT, RADARS, SATELLITES
AND OTHER SYSTEMS. HOWEVER, IF WE LOOK AT MANY MODERN EXPERIMENTS,
FIELD PROJECTS THAT TOOK MONTHS, EVEN YEARS, AND THAT COST
NOT THOUSANDS BUT MILLIONS OF DOLLARS, WE FIND THE SAME RESULT;
NAMELY, THAT THE RESULTS WERE INCONCLUSIVE. PROJECT WHITETOP,
IN THE MIDWEST, AND MORE RECENTLY, THE NATIONAL HAIL RESEARCH
EXPERIMENT ARE EXAMPLES. NEITHER OF THESE, OR MOST OF THE OTHER
MAJOR EXPERIMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN ATTEMPTED, WITH INCONCLUSIVE
RESULTS, LACKED RESOURCES OR TRAINED TECHNICIANS, OR KNOWLEDGE-
ABLE SCIENTIFIC PERSONNEL. WHAT THEY DID LACK AND STILL LACK,
IS BASIC UNDERSTANDING OF THE PHYSICAL PROCESSES THAT ARE
OPERATING IN THE ATMOSPHERE AND THAT ARE THE SUBJECTS OF
ATTEMPTS AT MODIFICATION. IN SOME, PERHAPS MOST, OF THE MAJOR
FIELD EXPERIMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN MOUNTED, DURING THE "SCIENTIFIC
ERA" OF WEATHER MODIFICATION IN THE GOVERNMENT, THAT IS SINCE
1946, THE INITIAL PREMISE ON WHICH THE EXPERIMENT WAS DESIGNED
WAS GROSSLY OVERSIMPLIFIED BY THE EXPERIMENTERS; THEY DID NOT
UNDERSTAND HOW COMPLEX THE ATMOSPHERIC MACHINE WITH WHICH THEY
WERE TRYING TO DEAL CAN BE. PERHAPS AN ILLUSTRATION WILL BE
HELPFUL. DR. LEWIS GRANT, OF COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY,
CONDUCTED TEN YEARS OF CLOUD SEEDING IN THE VICINITY OF CLIMAX,
COLORADO, BETWEEN 1960 AND 1970, THE EXPERIMENT WAS AN ATTEMPT
TO INCREASE SNOWPACK BY AUGMENTING OROGRAPHIC SNOWFALL (SNOW
THAT IS PRODUCED BY AIR BEING LIFTED AND THUS COOLED BECAUSE IT
MUST FLOW UPWARD ACROSS A MOUNTAIN RANGE). IN THE EARLY PART
OF THE EXPERIMENT, THE RESULTS WERE ALMOST TOTALLY INCONCLUSIVE;
THERE APPEARED TO BE NO INCREASE IN THE AMOUNT OF SNOW REACHING
THE GROUND. HOWEVER, AFTER CAREFUL ANALYSIS AND AFTER THE LEVEL
OF UNDERSTANDING OF THE METEOROLOGICAL SITUATIONS THAT WERE
OCCURING AROUND CLIMAX INCREASED, THE RESEARCHERS WERE ABLE TO
IDENTIFY A SIGNIFICANT NUMBER OF COMBINATIONS OF UPPER WIND
DIRECTION AND TEMPERATURE IN THE UPFLOWING AIR THAT COULD BE
SUCCESSFULLY EXPLOITED TO PRODUCE ADDITIONAL SNOW; THEY WERE
ALSO ABLE TO IDENTIFY SETS OF CONDITIONS UNDER WHICH SNOWFALL
WAS EITHER UNALTERED FROM THE NATURAL STATE OR ACTUALLY REDUCED.
DR. GRANT AND HIS ASSOCIATES BASED THEIR INITIAL EFFORTS ON A
GROSSLY OVERSIMPLIFIED MODEL. ONLY AFTER THEY INVESTIGATED
EXTENSIVELY WERE THEY ABLE TO DISCERN THE MORE SUBTLE FACTORS
THAT WERE INFLUENCING THE SITUATION. THE ICAS MEMBER AGENCIES
THAT CONDUCT WEATHER MODIFICATION EXPERIMENTS ARE OF THE
OPINION THAT WHAT IS NEEDED IS A BROADER BASE OF FUNDAMENTAL
UNDERSTANDING OF THE PHYSICS AND DYNAMICS OF THE ATMOSPHERE.
SUCH BASIC KNOWLEDGE MUST BE PURSUED IN A RELATIVELY FREE FASHION,
WITH A MINIMUM OF PRESSURE TO PRODUCE IMMEDIATE ECONOMIC
BENEFITS.
THE ICAS BELIEVES THAT ADEQUATE UNDERSTANDING OF THE PHYSICAL AND DYNAMIC PROCESSES IS A NECESSARY BUT NOT SUFFICIENT CONDITION FOR THE ROUTINE APPLICATION OF WEATHER MODIFICATION TECHNOLOGIES TO PROBLEM SOLVING. IT IS ALSO ESSENTIAL THAT THE TOTAL IMPACT OF THE APPLICATION OF A GIVEN TECHNOLOGY BE ADEQUATELY ASSESSED AND UNDERSTOOD BEFORE SUCH A TECHNOLOGY IS PUT INTO OPERATIONAL USE. IN ADDITION TO PURELY PHYSICAL IMPACTS, WEATHER MODIFICATION( OPERATIONS WILL HAVE ECONOMIC, POLITICAL, ECOLOGICAL, AND LEGAL
IMPLICATIONS THAT NEED TO BE THOROUGHLY RESEARCHED.
WEATHER MODIFICATION RESEARCH PROGRAM MAKES PROVISION FOR EXPLORING THESE FACETS OF THE ISSUE.
I DO NOT WANT TO LEAVE THIS COMMITTEE WITH THE FEELING
THAT THE SUBJECT OF WEATHER MODIFICATION HAS ONLY A NEGATIVE SIDE.
THERE ARE REAL SIGNS OF PROGRESS. TAKE FOR EXAMPLE FOG
DISSIPATION. As I POINTED OUT EARLIER THE U. S. AIR FORCE
HAS GONE OPERATIONAL WITH COLD FOG SYSTEMS. SO HAVE A NUMBER
OF THE NATION'S COMMERCIAL AIRLINES. MANY AIRFIELDS, ABOUT
20 AT LAST COUNT, IN THE WESTERN MOUNTAINOUS STATES HAVE
BEEN EQUIPPED WITH COLD FOG DISSIPATION SYSTEMS BY COMMERCIAL
INTERESTS, AIRLINES AND AIRPORT OWNERS. I THINK THAT THE ENTRY
OF COMMERCIAL FUNDING INTO FOG DISSIPATION IS A GOOD INDICATION
THAT IT IS COST EFFECTIVE. ANOTHER FEDERAL EFFORT, PRECIP-
ITATION AUGMENTATION IN FLORIDA, CONDUCTED BY NOAA, IS SHOWING
REAL PROMISE. NOAA HAS RATHER CLEARLY DEMONSTRATED A CAPABILITY
TO INCREASE RAINFALL AT THE GROUND. THE EFFORT AT PRESENT
IS SOMEWHAT LIMITED TO THE RELATIVELY STEADY-STATE METEOROLOGICAL
CONDITIONS THAT EXIST IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA, BUT PLANS HAVE
BEEN DRAWN TO ATTEMPT, IN THE FUTURE, TO EXTEND THE TECH-
NOLOGY TO OTHER SUITABLE LOCATIONS. INVESTIGATIONS ARE ALSO
BEING CONSIDERED TO ENABLE NOAA TO TRANSFER ITS DEVELOPING
TECHNOLOGY TO A MORE APPROPRIATE OPERATIONAL ENTITY, PERHAPS
STATE GOVERNMENT OR THE PRIVATE SECTOR.
IN 1975 THE DOMESTIC COUNCIL'S SUBCOMMITTEE ON CLIMATE
CHANGE CONSIDERED THE QUESTION OF THE FEDERAL ROLE IN WEATHER
MODIFICATION. AS A PART OF THAT CONSIDERATION, SOME HEARINGS
WERE HELD TO SAMPLE THE PUBLIC'S PERCEPTION OF THAT ROLE.
WITH REGARD TO REGULATION OF WEATHER MODIFICATION ACTIVITY,
THE OPINIONS WERE DIVIDED BETWEEN LET THE STATES DO IT, AND
LET THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT DO IT. WITH REGARD TO FUNDING,
THE VIEW SEEMED UNIFORM THAT RESEARCH ON WEATHER MODIFICATION
OUGHT TO BE A FEDERAL RESPONSIBILITY. WITH REGARD TO POLICY
AND ORGANIZATIONAL ISSUES, THERE WAS WIDE DIVERSITY. SOME
SAID THAT A SINGLE AGENCY APPROACH WOULD BE BEST; THE DEPART-
MENT OF AGRICULTURE WAS SINGLED OUT BY ONE SPEAKER. ANOTHER
CHAMPIONED NOAA AS LEAD AGENCY. OTHERS CALLED FOR A FEDERAL
COMMISSION APPOINTED BY THE PRESIDENT TO MANAGE THINGS. A
NATIONAL LABORATORY WAS ANOTHER SUGGESTION. ONE SPEAKER
SAID THAT THE GOVERNMENT EXPERTS DO NOT GET TOGETHER AND TALK
ABOUT THE SUBJECT ENOUGH. THE STATUS QUO, INDIVIDUAL AGENCY
MISSION-ORIENTED WEATHER MODIFICATION WAS URGED BY SOME.
OTHERS ARGUED THAT THE CONGRESS OUGHT TO MOVE TOWARDS A WELL
STATED NATIONAL POLICY WITH REGARD TO WEATHER MODIFICATION.
THE CREATION OF A NEW DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES WAS
VIEWED BY SOME AS THE SOLUTION OF THE DILEMMA OF WEATHER
MODIFICATION RESEARCH. THESE HEARINGS WERE EXTENSIVE AND
COVERED MANY MORE AREAS, WHO SHOULD PAY FOR WEATHER
MODIFICATION OPERATIONS, HOW CAN WEATHER MODIFICATION EFFORTS
BE EVALUATED, AND SO ON AND ON. THE TRANSCRIPT RAN WELL OVER
100 PAGES. THE POINT I AM TRYING TO MAKE IS THAT THERE IS
NOWHERE ANY SEMBLANCE OF UNANIMITY AS TO WHO OR WHAT SHOULD
CONTROL WEATHER MODIFICATION; THE SEVERAL STATES AND THE
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT DO NOT AGREE, THE VARIOUS EXPERTS AND
INTEREST GROUPS DO NOT AGREE, THE MANY FEDERAL AND OTHER
ADVISORY GROUPS DO NOT AGREE.
THE FEDERAL WEATHER MODIFICATION RESEARCH EFFORT HAS, OVER ITS 30 YEAR HISTORY, BEEN CHARACTERIZED AS POORLY COORDINATED BY THE VARIOUS STUDIES THAT HAVE BEEN MADE. WITHIN THE ICAS WE HAVE CONSIDERED COORDINATION AS IT IS DEFINED, NAMELY, HARMONIOUS ACTION, COMMUNICATION WITHIN GOVERNMENT, I SUBMIT THAT, USING THAT DEFINITION, THE WEATHER MODIFICATION RESEARCH PROGRAM IS PROBABLY AS WELL COORDINATED AS ANY EFFORT WITHIN THE GOVERNMENT, WITH THE POSSIBLE EXCEPTION OF PROGRAMS THAT ARE ENTIRELY WITHIN THE PURVIEW
OF A SINGLE AGENCY. THE CRITICS OF THE ICAS COORDINATION EFFORT, HOWEVER, SEEM TO HAVE BEEN INTERPRETING
INCLUDING MANAGEMENT, DIRECTION AND INITIATIVE; THE ICAS
IS NOT A MANAGEMENT AGENT.
THE ICAS PRESENTLY IS THE PRINCIPAL COORDINATING AGENT
FOR RESEARCH IN THE FIELD OF WEATHER MODIFICATION.
PERFORMED THAT ROLE SINCE ITS INCEPTION. THE COORDINATION
IS ACCOMPLISHED, FORMALLY, IN THREE WAYS. AT ITS REGULAR
MEETINGS THE ICAS FREQUENTLY REVIEWS THE MAJOR WEATHER MOD-
IFICATION PROGRAMS OF ITS MEMBER AGENCIES BY HEARING BRIEFINGS
ON THE PROJECTS BY THEIR WASHINGTON AND FIELD PROGRAM MANAGERS.
IN THIS WAY THE MEMBERS CAN COMPARE NOTES ON EXPERIMENTS,
RESULTS, PLANS, AND OPERATING PROBLEMS. THE MEMBERS ARE FREE
TO MAKE COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS FOR IMPROVEMENTS IN PRO-
CEDURES, TO CALL ATTENTION TO THEIR OWN EXPERIENCES IN SIMILAR
WORK, AND TO CRITICIZE AS APPROPRIATE. THE ICAS FORMS STANDING
AND AD HOC PANELS THAT ARE ASSIGNED RESPONSIBILITIES FOR
SPECIFIC FACETS OF THE WEATHER MODIFICATION PROGRAM.
|