|
<br />I
<br />I
<br />I
<br />I
<br />I
<br />I
<br />I
<br />I
<br />I
<br />I
<br />I
<br />I
<br />I
<br />I
<br />I
<br />I
<br />I
<br />I
<br />I
<br />
<br />wherever possible, to ensure minimal duplication of effort.
<br />
<br />Advances in remote sensing, other measurement technologies, and computational capabilities
<br />now make it possible to measure, model, and quantifY atmospheric processes as never before. With
<br />weather-related damage totals growing, the time has come for a concerted, well-focused effort to
<br />assess the hazards which might be effectively directly mitigated, develop viable mitigation strategies,
<br />and apply the resultant technologies.
<br />
<br />Present Direct Weather Damage Mitigation Efforts
<br />
<br />Weather damage takes a number offonns. Some results from specific, tangible events, such as
<br />hailstonns and tornadoes. Other problems result when expected weather does not occur, e.g.
<br />droughts that reduce crop production and limit water supplies.
<br />
<br />Mitigation efforts likewise take various fonns. For example, one might modifY the
<br />characteristics of property that render it susceptible to a specific hazard, e.g. the development of hail-
<br />resistant shingles, or removal ofproperty from the hazard (e.g. parking the car in the garage when a
<br />hailstorm approaches). A third option is to attempt to modifY directly the source of the hazard. In
<br />several states, operational programs presently exist which attempt to suppress hail formation through
<br />modification of the storm cloud itself Modifying the larger scale environmental factors that
<br />ultimately generate the weather hazard (e.g. the hailstorm) may some day be a consideration, but in
<br />most cases this is not presently possible. Other current direct mitigation efforts seek to increase net
<br />rainfall to improve crop conditions, increase groundwater recharge, augment snowfall, boost runoff
<br />into reservoirs, and dissipate cold fogs at airports.
<br />
<br />In the United States, there are presently operational atmospheric resource management
<br />programs in California, Colorado, Idaho, Kansas, Nevada, New Mexico, North Dakota, Texas, Utah,
<br />and Wyoming. A large program also exists in Alberta, Canada.
<br />
<br />These are programs of applied cloud seeding technology, designed to increase water supplies
<br />for municipal, agricultural, and industrial use for power generation, to recharge aquifers, to mitigate
<br />surface drought conditions, to reduce damaging hailfall, and to enhance mountain snow pack for
<br />increased runoff, which benefits fish and wildlife, consumptive users, and recreational interests.
<br />Sponsors are primarily local political subdivisions (counties, groundwater districts, cities) and private
<br />enterprise (utilities, ski resorts). Most states are also involved in regulatory or sponsoring capacities,
<br />or both.
<br />
<br />As a result ofthe apparent successes ofthese programs, application of atmospheric resource
<br />management technology is increasing, both in the U.S. and abroad. Very few programs presently
<br />have significant research or evaluation components, and many questions about their efficacy and
<br />uncertainties about their environmental impacts remain. This having been stated, it must be noted that
<br />as populations continue to grow, particularly in chronically water-short areas, the demand for viable
<br />atmospheric water management technologies is certain to increase in the years to come.
<br />
|