My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WMOD00598
CWCB
>
Weather Modification
>
DayForward
>
WMOD00598
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/28/2009 2:42:30 PM
Creation date
4/30/2008 2:48:03 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Weather Modification
Contract/Permit #
NOAA/NA-81-RAC-00023
Title
Evaluation of the Utah Operational Weather Modification Program - Final Report
Date
4/1/1982
State
UT
Weather Modification - Doc Type
Report
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
289
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 />analysis of precipitation changes recommended for the first year stated <br />as hypotheses in the CSU design study are as follows: <br /> <br />1. Seeding material released from ground generators being used <br />1n the present Utah weather modification program can reach seedable <br />cloud locations in the desired concentration levels to affect significant <br />parts of storms being seeded. <br /> <br />2. Sufficient supercooled water is present in storms (or portions <br />of storms) over the rtah mountains to permit seeding material to nucleate <br />and form additional precipitation. <br /> <br />3. Growth times and trajectories of the affected <br />(natural or artificially produced) are appropriate to <br />mountain slopes in the intended mountain area. <br /> <br />ice particles <br />intercept the <br /> <br />Another hypothesis, not directlv stated 1n the CSU design study, <br />refers to the statistical analysis of precipitation changes during the <br />several years of operation. That is, <br /> <br />4. Precipitation during the project period has been significantly <br />greater than what would have occurred in the absence of seeding. <br /> <br />In reporting the research and evaluation carried out on the Utah <br />operational project, two important factors should be recognized at this <br />point. The first factor is that the use of randomization was not <br />available. Although the USU proposal called for randomization, it <br />was later deleted due to operational considerations. Yet the need for <br />limited randomization is great when evaluation of operational projects is <br />being made. Only when randomization is used can assurance be given that <br />in the long run the treated and untreated events are from the same <br />population of cloud systems. <br /> <br />Consequently, there are many aspects of the present evaluation <br />that are affected by this difficulty. Even though var10US comparisons <br />between unseeded and seeded cloud or precipitation parameters are <br />made, there remains the question of whether the comparisons are between <br /> <br />3 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.