My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WMOD00116
CWCB
>
Weather Modification
>
Backfile
>
WMOD00116
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/28/2009 2:27:58 PM
Creation date
10/1/2006 2:13:30 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Weather Modification
Sponsor Name
MWDSC
Project Name
Weather Modification White Paper
Title
Weather Modification for Precipitation Augmentation and Its Potential Usefulness to the Colorado River Basin States
Prepared For
Colorado River 7 Basin States
Prepared By
Tom Ryan - Metro Water District of Southern California
Date
10/1/2005
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.
/
51
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 />In the early I 980s, the Basin States and Reclamation were preparing legislation to <br />authorize a cost-shared WxMod demonstration program for the Colorado River Basin <br />that focused on augmenting winter orographic storms. The high runoff years of 1983- <br />1986 and nearly full reservoirs thereafter prevented the program from proceeding. The <br />Basin-wide seeding program ideas was revived in the form of CREST (see above) during <br />the early 1990s, but was again not pursued. Reclamation could make an updated <br />evaluation of the status of the technology and its potential for augmenting the Colorado <br />River water supply. Such an endeavor could mitigate the adverse effects of climate <br />change, an inadvertent form ofWxMod. <br /> <br />Approaches <br /> <br />Funding of Research Institutes. The roadblocks impeding progress in weather <br />modification are part of the wider research problems facing atmospheric sciences as a <br />whole -lack of coordinated research. Since the 1980s the need for a large national <br />laboratory facility to study different simulation experiments has been identified. Such a <br />facility has not yet been created, nor is there even a mechanism for long-term planning <br />and funding of a laboratory for cloud physics research. There is no coordinated effort to <br />address the overall process of precipitation formation or ice interactions, only limited <br />studies by individuals. The California seeding group is proposing strong interactions <br />with research agencies, and possibly formation of a WxMod research facility. <br /> <br />Monitoring and Legislative Activities. The Basin States should monitor legislative <br />initiatives made in this field, such as the Congressional legislation or WDMP <br />continuance. This activity requires little effort or cost, but does not necessarily lead to a <br />new water supply because of the vagaries offederal interest and funding. Nevertheless, <br />participation of this type by state and private entities lends credibility to proposed <br />legislation. This activity could be one component of a larger set of activities that the <br />Basin States could undertake. <br /> <br />Program Development. The sponsorship decision to support an operational cloud seeding <br />program can be viewed as a risk management assessment. What is the risk of making the <br />wrong decision weighed against the potential benefit/cost ratio? Numerous studies have <br />demonstrated that a 10 to 15% increase in precipitation can provide sizable benefits to a <br />variety of stakeholders (irrigated agriculture, hydroelectric production, municipal water <br />supplies) at very favorable benefit ratios of5 to 10:1 or higher (001,1993). For <br />example, if a potential sponsor of a cloud seeding program, following careful <br />deliberation, decided they had an 80% likelihood of obtaining a 10% increase in <br />precipitation and that increase would yield a benefit/cost ratio of 10: I, they would <br />probably choose to support the program. However, as stated above, the initial costs of <br />developing a program are high, the permitting may be onerous, and the timeframe for the <br />production of additional water may be several to many years. Yet the benefit-to-cost <br />ratios are significantly greater than investment in other water development projects, such <br />as desalination or the construction of new reservoirs. <br /> <br />-23- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.