My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WMOD00104
CWCB
>
Weather Modification
>
Backfile
>
WMOD00104
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/27/2010 11:12:25 AM
Creation date
10/1/2006 2:12:52 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Weather Modification
Applicant
North American Weather Consultants, Inc.
Sponsor Name
Denver Water
Project Name
Cloud Seeding Evaluation
Title
Development of Traget/Control Evaluation Procedures For the Denver Board of Water Commissioners Winter Snowpack Enhancement Project
Prepared For
Denver Water
Prepared By
NAWC
Date
12/31/2002
County
Summit
Clear Creek
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.
/
41
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 />. <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />~ <br />~ <br />~ <br />~ <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />, <br />, <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />7. Summary, Conclusions and Recommendations <br /> <br />Summary <br /> <br />Development of the methodology for estimation of seeding effects for the Denver <br />Water project has incorporated most, if not all, the current conventional wisdom of the <br />weather modification community regarding evaluations of operational precipitation <br />enhancement projects. The key issues are very well described in Dennis (1980). <br />Dennis devotes a chapter of his book to evaluation of results, and in that chapter states <br />that "The most widely used approach to the evaluation of operational cloud seeding <br />programs is the comparison of events in the target area to events in one or more <br />control areas, which are assumed to be unaffected by the seeding." The chapter <br />specifies several important considerations in such work. In our initial recommendations <br />regarding the basic evaluation approach and in the details of its development, we have <br />addressed the key issues summarized by Dennis and have incorporated them into this <br />evaluation methodology. A few are listed here. <br /> <br />. Determination of the evaluation method should be made as early as possible, <br />ideally before the start of the field operations or certainly before the seeded <br />period ends. This goes far toward eliminating both unconscious bias and any <br />temptation to select data to demonstrate a desired result (Court, 1960). <br />. SpeCific target and control data sites are to be determined and stated, with <br />changes acceptable only if sites are decommissioned. <br />. The evaluation units or period should be speCified in the evaluation design. <br />. Longer evaluation periods and use of multiple data sites within the target area <br />and control area(s) help reduce the need for data transformations for <br />normalization. <br />. Selection of controls upwind of, or crosswind from, the target are desired, to <br />yield improved correlations, as well as avoiding physical contamination by the <br />project's seeding. <br />. Multiple control regions provide geographic, and hence, meteorological <br />bracketing, combined with longer evaluation periods, minimizing storm track and <br />storm type biases. <br /> <br />Conclusions <br /> <br />. The overall (full) target area regression equations are most representative, since <br />the sub-areas contain many fewer data sites. NAWC has specified use of these <br />equations for snowpack and precipitation data as the primary evaluation method <br />for the project. <br /> <br />27 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.