|
Statement of Otis B. Brown, Ph.D. Dean, Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Science, University of Miami and Member, Committee on Earth Science and Applications from Space National Research Council The National Academies before the The U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation Space, Aeronautics, and Related Sciences Subcommittee Hearing on
“National Imperatives for Earth Science Research” March 7, 2007
Mr. Chairman, Ranking Minority Member, and members of the committee: thank you for inviting me here to testify today. My name is Otis Brown, and I am Dean of the Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Science, University of Miami. I am also a member of the National Research Council’s Committee on Earth Science and Applications from Space. As dean of the Rosenstiel School, I have first-hand experience how satellite observations provide real-world results. Following Hurricane Katrina, imagery from our Center for Southeastern Tropical Advanced Remote Sensing (CSTARS) assisted relief and recovery efforts in New Orleans, tracking to see when and where flood waters had receded to increase the effectiveness of rescue efforts. Also pertinent to the environmental challenges presenting themselves in the Gulf states, we employed satellite imagery that identifies the rate of subsidence in the Mississippi Delta and New Orleans – equally invaluable information when making decisions about the reality and requirements of rebuilding in this area and long-term environmental challenges. This same imagery is what we use to monitor water levels in the Everglades and outbreaks of red tide. And, uses for satellite data only continue to grow as we learn to “see” phenomena like changes in sea surface temperature, sea level, and the size of polar ice caps. I cannot emphasize enough how vital satellite imagery has become to earth observation and consequently our ability to predict, plan, prepare, and respond. I’ve been asked to discuss my perspectives on the “National Imperatives for Earth Sciences Research.” This topic includes areas relevant to many parts of the federal government. My testimony today focuses on the roles of NASA and NOAA. It also addresses some resource and coordination issues for these two agencies. As you may know I have been part of the team that recently produced a decadal plan for Earth observations from space, which provides a prioritized roadmap. Our vision is captured in the following declaration: Understanding the complex, changing planet on which we live, how it supports life, and how human activities affect its ability to do so in the future is one of the greatest intellectual challenges facing humanity. It is also one of the most important challenges for society as it seeks to achieve prosperity, health, and sustainability. As detailed in the NRC report, and further emphasized by the latest report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), our planet is faced with a number of significant scientific and societal challenges and their impacts on key parts of our society, economy, and health. The two-year study contained in the NRC report delineates how NASA’s Earth science budget has declined 30 percent since 2000, with more funding reductions planned as its priority missions of manned trips to Mars and a station on the Moon take further hold. The National Ocean and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) likewise faces funding challenges with its National Polar-Orbiting Operational Environmental Satellite System (NPOESS) – now three years behind schedule and $3 billion over budget. Additionally, many of the satellite system’s advanced weather and climate instruments have been dropped to address cost and schedule challenges. Meanwhile, current satellites continue to age, and many of us foresee major shortcomings in satellite observations by the end of this decade that will undo much of the progress we have made in earth observation and weather prediction. So, at a time when our need for understanding the Earth system and the need for Earth observations have never been greater, we are faced with declining investments in Earth science, and, an Earth observation program that will significantly diminish in capability over the next decade. The first question the National Research Council committee had to address was the national capabilities for Earth observations. We were troubled by the answer. We found that the current investment strategies had led to a system at risk of collapse. That assessment was based on the observed decline in funding for Earth-observation missions in NASA and the consequent cancellation, downsizing, and delay of a number of critical missions and instruments in both agencies. Since the interim report, matters have only worsened, with further cancellations, descopings and delays of NOAA and NASA satellite plans. This will result in an overall degradation of the network of Earth-observing satellites. There are many potential consequences. Some examples are: · Weather forecasts and warnings may become less accurate, putting more people at risk and diminishing the proven economic value of accurate forecasts – this is particularly important to this country since we must cope with many forms of extreme weather, be it in the form of hurricanes, tornadoes, drought, floods or winter storms. · Climate variability and the rate of change need to be better quantified. Earth is warming because of a small imbalance between incoming solar radiation and outgoing radiation from Earth. Without the recommended measurements, we will not be able to quantify how this net energy imbalance is changing, or when or if the planet will stop warming. · Climate models have improved steadily over the years, but are far from perfect and must be improved if we are to intelligently cope with climate change. Satellites provide unique observations of the Earth system and validate and improve these models. · Sea level is rising and glaciers and ice-fields around the world are melting, but we just don’t know how fast these are occurring. Without continuing quantitative observations provided via satellites, we can’t know how these rates change or the implications for coastal communities. · Satellite observations could well be pivotal in resolving a controversy about whether the frequency and intensity of hurricanes are increasing; observations of the atmosphere and oceans are essential. · The limited signals of cataclysmic activity come through vigilant observation. That means the risk of missing early detection of earthquakes, tsunamis, and volcanic eruptions will increase. · The bottom line is: Earth science is based fundamentally on observations. While it is impossible to predict what scientific advances will not occur without the observations, or what surprises we will miss, we can be sure the rate of scientific progress will be greatly slowed – perhaps even undone to some degree. Without a doubt, it takes us backwards rather than forwards. Significant advances in hurricane forecasting over the past three decades have come from orbiting satellites that take timely, high-resolution pictures and provide improved estimates of surface wind over the ocean. The satellite images are all over the TV for the public to view, but scientists, dissect them further. From sea level, sea surface temperatures and winds to red tide outbreaks and oil spills, satellite observations afford us a better, informed view of our Earth. The climate debate has been driven by debate over model capabilities and the lack of long-term critical observations relevant to climate. Many of the capabilities to make such observations exist in the research domain, but have not been transitioned into an operational setting. Our NRC report noted the difficulties in transferring NASA and NOAA research into operational use. That is because there is currently no process to include the necessary scientific input, resources and exploitation capabilities to either facilitate or to define this transition. Thus, we are seeing the winding down of the NASA Earth Observing System and its broad Earth-observing capabilities and information delivery systems, with no apparent way for our nation to harvest the fruits of this multi-billion dollar investment, or, to continue prototype research systems with proven operational value. The follow-on NOAA system, NPOESS, is late and more than likely will not overlap the NASA systems, and, most of the climate-related capabilities are not in its baseline. Put succinctly, much needed long-term time-series of Earth processes required for decisions in this changing world will be lost. This is due to the lack of a functional relationship between research (NASA) and operations (NOAA) for Earth observing systems, and, a lack of resources in NOAA to address all its Earth observing requirements. The challenge in Earth sciences is that the breadth of study is so large that it’s difficult to develop a set of priorities across disciplines. This is the first ever report to provide an integrated set of national priorities for Earth observing from space. It’s equally difficult for anyone to imagine how it affects them individually. Often times, it seems we speak in a foreign language about solar irradiance, vector sea surface winds, limb sounding of ozone profiles and water vapor soundings from geostationary and polar orbits – perhaps this is not the clearest way for the public to understand how humans have become dependent on tools that reside in outer space. What is important to understand about the plan our committee recommended is that its financial requirements are NOT astronomical. In fact, implementing all of the recommendations requires only that we bring the program up to funding levels comparable to the year 2000. The plan we recommend calls for undertaking 17 new NASA and NOAA missions in the period 2008-2020, as well as restoring some of the capabilities lost on NPOESS and GOES, and revitalizing a few delayed NASA missions like GPM and Landsat. Our recommendations for NASA can be implemented in an extremely cost-effective manner. The committee understood the financial constraints and therefore had to find missions capable of tackling several scientific questions simultaneously. The result is that we reduced the number of possible new missions from more than 100 down to 17 broad-ranging, high-value, multipurpose missions. But to accomplish this, NASA’s Earth science budget must be restored to year 2000 funding levels. We think this is very reasonable given the obvious societal needs and benefits. The truth of the matter is that this field of science is inextricably linked to our daily life and that of future generations. Climate variability and natural disasters are taking a significant toll on our economy, our environment, and our well being. And, that is why we must sustain the Earth observations that underpin national preparedness and response. Implementing these missions will not only greatly reduce the risk of natural disasters of all kinds to the people of our country and the world, they will also support more efficient management of natural resources including water, energy, fisheries, and ecosystems, and support the economy. Thus, the cost of the program is repaid many times over. The observing system we envision is affordable and will help establish a firm, sustainable foundation for Earth science and real societal benefits through the year 2020 and beyond. Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today. I would be pleased to answer any questions that you may have.
|
