Laserfiche WebLink
<br />6. Recommendations <br /> <br />The following recommendations are tempered by the <br />realization that last summer's program was a response <br />to an emergency of considerable rarity. The Panama <br />Canal Commission was faced with the worst water <br />shortage in the 69-year history of the canal. <br /> <br />This was a rare occurrence, but not unprecedented. It <br />mayor may not recur soon. Although progress is being <br />made in predicting the worldwide climatic conditions <br />associated with drought in Panama, the prospect of <br />reliable forecasts at an early date is dim. <br /> <br />Cloud seeding to enhance precipitation cannot be <br />expected to provide quick and total relief for a drought <br />which takes years to develop. The moderate amount of <br />added precipitation from emergency cloud sel!ding will <br />not make up for this deficiency but it will certainly help. <br />A program of precipitation enhancement is more effec- <br />tive in alleviating the impact of drought if it is Ulsed on a <br />long term basis to increase and maintain water in stor- <br />age by applying it during average and above average <br />precipitation years when the opportunities are more <br />plentiful. However, if emergency cloud seeding opera- <br />tions are considered for future use, a number of steps <br />should be taken to maximize the effectiveness of its <br />implementation, both scientifically and economically. <br /> <br />f' <br />, <br /> <br />The first recommendation is that a rational decision <br />criterion be developed in the form of a runninB assess- <br />ment of the benefits and costs of resuming an emergency <br />cloud-seeding operation. This running aSSl2ssment <br />should be designed to take into account the current <br />status of water storage in the system and climatically <br />expected changes due to rainfall, evaporation, etc. It <br /> <br />should also consider climatic variability and the proba- <br />bility of water storage conditions associated with <br />drought. These objective criteria should be used to <br />all!rt the Commission management to the approach of <br />a critical situation and furnish current information on <br />benefits and costs likely to be involved in an emergency <br />cloud-seeding operation. <br /> <br />The effectiveness of any future cloud-seeding operation <br />can be substantially enhanced by certain relatively <br />modest preparations. One lesson learned was that <br />presentation on the radar screen of the position of each <br />of the seeder aircraft would have enabled the project <br />meteorologist to direct the aircraft to seeding oppor- <br />tunities more quickly and with greater assurance. It is <br />therefore recommended that consideration be given to <br />equipping the Commission's excellent meteorological <br />radar with means of receiving and displaying signals <br />from a standard aircraft transponder to show contin- <br />uously the position of the aircraft. It is noted that <br />equipment is available to display only selected signals <br />up to the number of six, each with its own identification. <br /> <br />Certain steps may also be appropriate to permit a <br />bl!tter assessment of any future operation. A step in <br />this direction would be to identify a candidate control <br />area suitable for a future target-control evaluation, <br />instrument it with rain gages, and begin accumulating <br />historical data from which a target-control regression <br />can be established. Another step would be to study <br />further the large volume of computer analyses of the <br />past summer's Albrook Field rawinsonde observations <br />now available, to see if these can be better used to <br />assess seeding opportunities and recommend optimum <br />seeding strategies. <br /> <br />15 <br />