My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WMOD00295
CWCB
>
Weather Modification
>
DayForward
>
WMOD00295
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/28/2009 2:34:07 PM
Creation date
4/11/2008 3:44:32 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Weather Modification
Title
Guidelines for Cloud Seeding to Augment Precipitation
Date
1/1/1995
Weather Modification - Doc Type
Report
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
159
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />38 <br /> <br />CLOUD SEEDING <br /> <br />propriate. Providing trained project personnel to work with community <br />concerns may be appropriate. <br />Formal decision processes that protect public interests and respond to <br />public concerns lead to greater community satisfaction with the decision <br />outcome. Figure 2.6 illustrates one concept of the stages in the weather <br />modification decision process; factors affecting community response to <br />cloud seeding are listed. All these community response factors feed into <br />the decision-influencing factors listed above. <br />According to the CSU study, the primary factor that determines <br />whether cloud seeding technology will be accepted and applied is the <br />informal influences in the project area at hand (Figure 2.6). <br /> <br />If the informal power brokers in the community favor its use or <br />continuance, then a project will tend to go forward...Those [power <br />brokers] left unconsulted, uninformed, their concerns unattended <br />to, become the seedbed of opponent action. The second factor...is <br />the relative advantage [Figure 2.6] that adopting cloud seeding pro- <br />vides the community's members, as compared with not doing so <br />or with doing something else. Cost-effectiveness and benefits to <br />the local economy without undue risks (guaranteed by adequate <br />safeguards) are essential to implementing and continuing projects. <br />These benefits mU!it be perceived by the local people, not merely <br />asserted by proponents, scientists, or officials (Farhar and Fitzpa- <br />trick 1990). <br /> <br />The safeguards, for example, might be suspension criteria for opera- <br />tions when snowpack is some defined level above normal or when ava- <br /> <br />S1age 1: -+ St-o-2Md5: - St-o-3: Stage ,,: <br /> Oeclelon to Inhlate - <br />Projec:l planning or Projec:l Ob.ervation <br />,...valuatlon or decision to Implementation 01 eneClS <br /> conllnue/dlsoonllnue <br />'Relatlw advantage 'Informationallnftuence. . Observation <br />Economic _II-belng Formal declslon maldng Attribution <br />PolariZation Information and <br />Bellelln efIlc:acy persuasion <br />Risk _melll <br />C~lbllly <br />Brok8rlchange agent <br />behavior <br />r <br /> <br />Figure 2.6-Stages in the Cloud Seeding Project Decision Process. Asterisks <br />Indicate Most Influential Factors (Farhar and Fitzpatrick 1990) <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.