My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WMOD00063
CWCB
>
Weather Modification
>
Backfile
>
WMOD00063
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/28/2009 2:27:39 PM
Creation date
10/1/2006 2:12:02 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Weather Modification
Applicant
Steven M. Hunter
Sponsor Name
California Energy Commission
Project Name
Optimizing Cloud Seeding for Water and Energy in California
Title
Optimizing Cloud Seeding for Water and Energy in California
Prepared For
California Energy Commission
Prepared By
Steven M. Hunter
Date
3/31/2006
State
CA
Country
United States
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.
/
53
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 />assessmcnt and generator placement as well as evaluation of secding effects, The output of such <br />models is exemplified in Figure 5. Hydrologic models have been uscd to estimatc streamtlows <br />resulting from assumed secding-induced snowpack increases. Modeling has seen considerable <br />improvemcnt in physical simulation, theory, speed, sophistication, and accuracy, as <br />acknowledged in the NRC report. Nevertheless, model simulations arc not presently accurate <br />enough to distinguish seeded from natural precipitation or strcamtlow, and therefore models are <br />generally used for guidance purposes only, Use of models in conjunction with physical <br />mcasurements and statistical analyses can be a vcry useful integrated approach, however. There <br />are some instances of mod cling results comparing favorably with physical sampling7o. <br /> <br />Statistical Techniques, Statistics have bccn the most common and long-standing tools to <br />asscss seeding elTects, having been used almost since the inccption of wcather modification <br />itself. The task has proven tomlidable, sincc precipitation augmentation from seeding is small <br />compared to the natural variability of precipitation, The problem is exaccrbated because it is <br />ditlicult even to prcdict thc bchavior of natural clouds, The statistical approach has largcly <br />consisted of two types - historical target-control regrcssion and randomizcd seeding trials, Thc <br />former attempts to comparc precipitation from an area assumed to bc targetcd by sccding and <br />from a nearby but similar area unaffectcd by seeding (similar in geography, altitude etc.). This <br />approach requircs a suitably long duration of observations in both the scedcd and non-sceded <br />arcas during the historical period, to establish a rclationship for predicting natural target <br />precipitation during the operational sccding period. Departurcs between prcdicted and obscrved <br />target amounts can then be statistically tested. The comparison can be between variables such as <br />snow watcr and runoll as well as precipitation. A long duration, perhaps 10 ycars or more, is <br />required to achieve stable. statistically significant results (as cxemplified by some Kings River <br />invcstigationsI9'1o), The main assumption hcrc is that the relationship between natural <br />prccipitation in thc target and control arcas is stablc with time, therefore littlc c1imatc change, <br />The validity of this assumption and other limitations of target-control regression have been <br />described by Silvcmlan (Appendix A) and others18. <br /> <br />The "gold standard" of statistical techniques for cvaluation of sceding effccts is the <br />randomized experiment, and is encouraged by the weather modification opcrational and research <br />communities3!. This approach rcquires a careful (l priori design. unlike many regrcssion <br />analyses that have bcen done post hoc. This dcsign would bc for an exploratory or confimlatory <br />cxperiment that is bascd on findings from a prcceding modcl or cxploratory experiment. <br />Experimcntal units of a fixed duration are eithcr seeded or unseedcd (placebo) and variables <br />(usually prccipitation) from the two pcriods are compared. It is essential that natural <br />precipitation in one o,r morc ncarby c.ontrol.arcas be measured.. tOAf~ard against, statistical.crrors <br />and to allow completIOn of the cxpenment In a reasonablc penod ' . Randomized expcnments <br />require numerous. precise measurement of EU response variables and typically live or more <br />years of data to achieve statistically significant results. Since a portion of the EUs in randomized <br />expcriments must be unsecded. they are more costly and arc thercfore usually auemptcd only <br />\....ithin rcsearch projects. There have bccn relativdy few such experiments in the Western United <br />States. Moreover. thesc experiments have not always adequately studied rele....ant physical <br />processes and T&D. leading somc to question their conclusions, The reccnt Utah \VD~tp <br />randomizcd cxperiment used high-resolution crosswind control and target area snow gauges, <br />short duration EUs. and thrce ditTerent statistical tests. These capabilities Icd to strongly <br />suggestivc positive seeding etTects o....er just one winter.J7;.I9, Whilc this experiment was <br /> <br />23 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.