New $50 million hurricane research center: a bad idea
Hurricane track forecasts have improved by about 50% over the past twenty years, which has undoubtedly saved many lives and billions of dollars. These forecast improvements have primarily resulted from the investment made in hurricane research, which has been funded at approximately $50 million per year over that period. To me, it is unfathomable that our nation spends so little on scientific research that provides such an incredible value. The President's National Science Board, which makes budget recommendations for the National Science Foundation (NSF), agrees, and recommended a six-fold increase in hurricane research spending to $300 million per year in a 2007 report. But exactly how much "bang for the buck" are we getting from hurricane research? The answer is murky, making it difficult to excite the kind of attention and political appeal needed to give hurricane research funding the big shot in the arm it deserves. However, recent moves by the Obama administration show that they are taking notice of the need to spend more money on hurricane research. But, a recent proposal by Rep. Alan Grayson, D-Florida, to build a new $50 million hurricane research center in Orlando, is the wrong way to boost hurricane research.
Figure 1. A science team led by NOAA's Hurricane Research Division (HRD) prepares for a mission into Hurricane Gustav in 2008. Image credit: NOAA/HRD.
How current hurricane research is funded
In 2008, about $50 million was spent by the U.S. government on hurricane research, with about 25% of this total going to maintain the facilities that do the research. The $50 million funded 228 person-years of research. About 35% of this was provided by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), with the rest of the money coming from the National Science Foundation (NSF), Office of Naval Research (ONR), and NASA. An additional $4 million was earmarked by Congress in 2008 to fund NOAA's promising new effort to improve hurricane intensity forecasts--the Hurricane Forecast Improvement Project (HFIP).
Where future funding increases should go: HFIP and JHT
The President's proposed FY 2010 budget continues the roughly $50 million dollars the hurricane research community traditionally gets, but adds $13 million in funding for the HFIP effort. To me, this is a great way to channel new hurricane research funding, as the HFIP effort is heavily focused on improving hurricane intensity forecasts, which have not improved at all over the past twenty years. Specific advancements outlined in the HFIP plan include:
1) Improving hurricane track forecast accuracy by 50% out to 5 days by 2018.
2) Improving hurricane intensity forecast accuracy by 50% out to 5 days by 2018.
3) Extending the lead time for hurricane forecasts out to 7 days.
4) Reducing the false alarm rate for rapid intensity forecasts.
5) Increasing the probability of detection of rapid intensification.
Another great way to boost hurricane research funding would be to put more money into NOAA's Joint Hurricane Testbed (JHT) project. This $1 million per year program has funded 50 separate hurricane research efforts over since 2001, 30 of which have been adopted operationally by the National Hurricane Center. Examples of successful JHT projects include the successful integration of the Stepped Frequency Microwave Radiometer (SFMR) surface wind measurement instrument into NHC operations; improvements to the GFDL and HWRF computer models; and improving techniques to make a "consensus" forecast based on the output of our four best computer models. However, no new money for JHT has been proposed in the FY 2010 budget, though some of the money earmarked for HFIP may flow into JHT.
A new $50 million hurricane research center proposed
Instead, a new proposal for hurricane research funding has been championed by Representative Alan Grayson, D-Florida. According to an article in the Orlando Sentinel, Grayson is pushing for a new $50 million hurricane research center to be built in Orlando. He demanded that such a hurricane research center be built in exchange for his vote for the controversial climate change bill passed Friday by the U.S. House, the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009. There is no language in the actual bill authorizing funds for such a center--Grayson merely has the word of democratic lawmakers, including President Obama, that such a center would be built. "I think it's a very worthwhile project. I look forward to working on it and making it a priority as the legislative process moves along," said U.S. Rep. Henry Waxman, the California Democrat who sponsored the bill, in the Orlando Sentinel article. The center could be constructed with funds aimed at helping states "study and adapt to climate change," money that would not be available until 2012 at the earliest. The hurricane center is "among the type of activities that would be eligible to receive funding," Waxman said. "We've never had anything [like this] come into this district before, ever," said Grayson, a freshman lawmaker. "This will be the world-leading facility for hurricane research. This will draw people from all over the world."
Well, I have championed efforts to give more funding to hurricane research over the years, and I think the $300 million per year in funding for the National Hurricane Research Initiative proposed in 2007 by the President's National Science Board is what is needed. However, I think Grayson's proposed new hurricane center is a bad idea. Florida already has a world-leading facility for hurricane research, NOAA's Hurricane Research Division on Virginia Key, and does not need another. The U.S. hurricane research community has an infrastructure in place that works, and the best way to foster hurricane research is to pump money into this existing infrastructure. I talked with a number of senior hurricane research scientists about the idea of a new hurricane research center, and none of them supported it. It's great that Rep. Grayson's wants to put new much-needed funding into hurricane research, but he didn't consult with the experts to see if a new research center was a good way to do this. It isn't. Where are all of the scientists needed to staff such a center going to come from? Presumably, they will be drawn from existing successful research teams, leading to the disruption of these proven research efforts. Adding a new national research center with a new bureaucracy with new management needing on-the-job training will dilute and distract from current hurricane research efforts, and is not a good way to spend $50 million. Several senior hurricane research scientists are going to be reaching out to Rep. Grayson over the next few months to make him more aware of the abilities and needs of the hurricane research community. Hopefully, these efforts will result in a more productive way for the Congressman to boost hurricane research. If you live in Rep. Grayson's district, I recommend you contact him to express your desire to see him champion a more effective way to boost hurricane research than with his proposed $50 million hurricane research center. Putting the $50 million into the National Hurricane Research Initiative (HFIP) effort would be a better use of the funds. To his credit, Rep. Grayson is a co-sponsor of the National Hurricane Research Initiative of 2009 (H.R. 327), a bill introduced into the House of Representatives on January 8, 2009. This bill is a lesser ($150 million per year) version of the $300 million per year National Hurricane Research Initiative proposed in 2007 by the President's National Science Board.
Good links for HFIP information are at:
http://www.nrc.noaa.gov/HFIPDraftPlan.html
http://www.dtcenter.org/plots/hrh_test/workshop20 09/presentations/1_Gall_HRH%20HFIP%20presentation. pdf
Some summaries of recent HFIP activities in the last year are at:
http://www.dtcenter.org/plots/hrh_test/index.php
http://rammb.cira.colostate.edu/research/tropical _cyclones/hfip/workshop_2009/
My next post will be Friday, when I'll have the first half of July hurricane outlook.
Jeff Masters
Reader Comments
Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 — Blog Index
just trying to give him just a tiny bit of credit. oh well i said i wouldn't get involved so that's all im posting.
Do I misunderstand EL Nino? I was always told that it caused the GOM to have more intense storms.
It has very slight low-level turning but that is not uncommon near the Columbian Heat Low. The convection is being caused by divergence south of an upper low in the western Caribbean coupled with instability due to the Columbian low. There are no surface features in the area so I don't think there are any chances of development.
Ok and 2004 had a weak El Nino. So I would say it signifies such but not related to activity in the tropics.
I'm not sure what model hints you're referring to. I haven't noticed anything in that area on the models for the next week but if you've got a link I'd be glad to see it.
I don't see anything significant making use of those warm SSTs during the first half of July, and 2 weeks out is all I'm comfortable with saying that. The western Caribbean may see more bursts of moisture come out of the eastern Pacific like we saw with invest 93L which is why I think it's the 2nd-most-likely area to see a tropical disturbance in the next 2 weeks, but it will depend a lot on what's going on in the east Pacific.
wowww is this what I should expect every once in a while I check to see whats up with the tropics? I hope your all pleased how good you make dr. master's blog look. im not going to get closer to involved than this post.
I have to be honest that yes it can get so, but do not come to expect it since the blog still provides good info. And I apologize you had to see such.
This is what happens when you get a room full of child "prodigys".
It is very hard to prove something like that. I don't have a great knowledge of hurricane history so I can't tell you if El Nino years have had strong gulf hurricanes. In general El Nino lowers the potential for intense hurricanes in the Atlantic, but there is always the potential for a big storm, especially in a year like this with very warm SSTs relative to normal.
90L TCR
Ok I remember that run now, it was yesterday or the day before when the GFS tried to pull a miracle with that wave as it hit the lessers. It's always possible but in my opinion very unlikely. Higher than normal easterlies in the Caribbean are producing surface divergence near and east of the Antilles, and ruining surface convergence in the central/east Caribbean. Unless you get an already formed cyclone in moving into that area it's extremely difficult to get a tropical wave to develop with such strong surface winds.
I think I meant the more amount instead of intensity of hurricanes. But Thank you
This is awesome.
Well again hard to prove in a certain area....but in general El Nino statistically lowers the average number of storms that form in the season. There is one fairly common theme among El Nino year tracks where they tend to form further north...north of 20N, and less south of 20N in the deep tropics due to lower SSTs and higher wind shear that usually accompanies an El Nino episode.
What on earth does this have to do with anything?
Yeah into the east Pacific lol. Areas of thunderstorms near and north of Panama are common, and in this case are being enhanced by upper divergence. This energy looks to be heading west into the east Pacific along with the rest of the convection. To top it off a bunch of upper lows are going to be dancing around in the Caribbean for a while which will make upper-level conditions unfavorable for development in the short term.
To people in the real world, a lot. To this blog, nothing...but with all of the crap that is flying around here this year it truly fits.
The trough that is sitting up north of me, in northern Florida. When will that move out of here?
I don't know anybody who could care less about either of those things.
Should be out by the weekend but I believe another may be setting up for early next week.
That particular trough is forecast to pull out in 3-4 days. It's looking like most of the troughs after it will be further east after that, with the mean position just off the eastern seaboard as the big upper high over Texas shifts eastward.
Well, it's July 1, and for the first time in a month (so far!) we've had a 24-hour period without rain over New Providence. I need to look at that MJO forecast to see when it was forecast to shift.....
How're the waves today???
Repost from earlier:
Dr. M and I agree completely on the hurricane research funding. Why not expand efforts at existing successful centers? Adding one would be like having a new climate institute and taking all things climate away from the NCDC.
Additionally, it is common for us to have a dearth of observational info about a strong cane at landfall and I happen to know that the FCMP, Texas Tech, and other teams have no funding this year, or next, so far. These guys are the ones parking mobile towers, radars, and stick net monitors in the path of a landfall that gives us what little information we do have for any given cane at landfall. They could use a little money (not even a blip on the screen out of $300 M).
I know a bunch of these guys. Many are participating in VORTEX2 (the mobile radar and sticknet guys) and really do not have the funding to go out in front of canes. Many will find a way to do it anyway, but they could sure use some funds and a stable source for a few years. Then they could possibly expand their capabilities in the off seasons.
Viewing: 451 - 501
Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 — Blog Index