laws-both to control and monitor weather modification and to promote public participation-were developed as the science became better understood and the public concerns became more definable. New state laws in Texas, Colorado, and Illinois have shown the way toward competent, legal, state-level management of weather modification but do not address the issue of water rights. The Federal government had stayed out of the weather modification control arena, and established only reporting requirements for weather modification activities during the 1960s. In 1976 a new Federal law was signed, requiring that the Department of Commerce develop a national program for weather modification in one year and submit it to the President and Congress. At presstime, this much-delayed report has not been submitted by DOC although the Weather Modification Advisory Board, appointed by DOC to write such a program plan, finished its major report in July 1978. Political interest and concern in the field has always been present, generally with Congress supportive of R&D in weather modification and the Administration being less interested and low key about the science. Congressional interest took on a negative aspect when reports of the use of rain making in Vietnam appeared. This raised the issue of the international use of weather modification in warfare, and has subsequently led to an almost total withdrawal of Defense Department support of research in weather modification. The primary Federal agencies currently supporting research in weather modification are the Department of Interior (Bureau of Reclamation), the Department of Commerce (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration), and the National Science Foundation. Economists also became involved in weather modification. Modeling of economic impacts and related data gathering were begun in the late 1960s and led to the first serious economic studies of weather modification. However, this How a northwestern Kansas farmer's net income for wheat production would change due to various degrees of postulated hail and rainfall modification. Annual average national additional production of selected commodities and goods, based on 10 percent additional is still an area requiring more research. Sociologists also began to study certain areas of weather modification, essentially by asking comprehensive questions of people in weather modification areas. Their studies have recently established profiles for different parts of the nation as to public beliefs and attitudes about modification, and have helped to clarify several critical societal aspects therein. Ecologists were another group of "outside actors" to become involved in weather modification in the late 1960s. They focused on the impact of altered precipitation on the ecosystem. These efforts have suffered, however, as in economic research, by the lack of quantified information about how weather actually affects environmental systems. The environmental investigations also addressed the political impacts of the cloud seeding agents, such as silver iodide, on the environment. Dry ice is the other major seeding agent; experiments have also been conducted with urea. Weather modifiers must deal with the environmental impact on big game herds when mountain snowpacks are increased. Comprehensive Impact Studies Two weather modification research projects outlined here were notable pioneering efforts in addressing weather modification in a comprehensive way. In the 1960s, the Illinois State Water Survey initiated a series of weather modification projects in the belief that weather modification would eventually be attempted in Illinois and the Midwest. The Survey concentrated on the design of hail suppression and rain enhancement experiments to answer the dual question, "Can we, and should we, attempt to modify the weather?" Thus, a key element in the overall program was the inclusion of environmental, economic, societal, and legal concerns. For instance, Illinois then had no state law relating to weather modification, and Survey scientists, in conjunction with legal experts, developed a model state law enacted in 1973. Environmental research into weather effects on game animals and insects was undertaken; a public attitude survey was conducted; and economic studies were madeone dealing with agriculture and the other with The National Hail Research Experiment (NHRE) was started in northeastern Colorado during 1972 in a major national effort to conduct a hail suppression experiment within a framework of physical meteorological studies. Much of the Federal funding to the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) and universities was directed to the conduct of field experiments involving aircraft, weather radars and other sophisticated equipment. However, funds were also allocated by NCAR for an all-important effort dealing with societal and environmental issues. These included the sampling of public attitudes in and around the experimental area; the formation of a public information system; studies of the potential impacts of silver iodide on the environment; and economic studies of the impact of losses caused by hail in the region. Growing national concern in the 1960s with how to cope with new technologies led to development of several methods to examine and assess societal impacts of new technologies. One of these methodologies, called "technology assessment," has been employed in two recent extensive weather modification assessments. In one, the Stanford Research Institute conducted a technology assessment focusing on the values and effects of snowfall enhancement in the Upper Colorado River Basin. More recently, the Illinois State Water Survey conducted a technology assessment of hail suppression involving its atmospheric scientists and social, legal, economic, and environmental experts from around the nation. Both of these assessments provided relatively useful in-depth looks at the complexities of issues relating to weather modification. For example, the hail suppression assessment (Hail Suppression: Impacts and Issues, Changnon et al 1977) points to the fact that for hail suppression to be socially acceptable, the technology will have to have a scientifically supported capability and be able to suppress 50 percent or more of all hail losses. Even with hail suppression capabilities of up to 80 percent by 1995, adoption of hail suppression is predicted to occur only in the great plains, with hail insurance a more viable option for addressing hail loss in the eastern half of the United States. Another key finding shows how the net income would vary for a Kansas wheat farmer for various postulated levels of hail suppression and simultaneous rain changes (increases or decreases). First, the rainfall, along with efforts to reduce hail, will vary considerably the farmer's personal income around the "no weather change" of about $24 per acre. A 50 percent hail decrease accompanied by a 10 percent rainfall decrease would not help him, but an 80 percent decrease in hail and a 10 percent increase in rain would be very valuable, worth about $7 per acre, or a 30 percent increase in gross income. In Kansas (and most areas at the margin of adequate rainfall), crop production is much more sensitive to minor rainfall changes than to sizeable hail reductions. These technology assessments illustrated the types of socio-economic evaluations so desperately needed in developing governmental policy about local, state, and Federal involvement in weather modification research, use, and control. Environmental Issues Any effort to modify the weather to better serve human needs has an "environmental impact." The protection of nature from man, a philosophy of resource management to minimize waste, became the dominant ethic in the 1960s. Assessing biospheric impacts resulting from weather changes is complicated by an environmental data base that lacks cause-effect hypotheses. Very little effort has been devoted in the past to collecting and organizing meaningful data on environmental changes that could result from weather or climate changes. The environmental effects of weather modification may be both beneficial and adverse. Hydrologists can recognize and even predict with their models some of the outcomes of altered precipitation quantity, frequency or intensity. There could be increased forage production that benefits both domestic livestock and herbivorous wildlife, while at the same time adversely impacting the habitats of some other animals or contributing to the demise of an endangered species. Some of these effects may never occur, and we know that most will not be identifiable until weather changes have persisted for many years. We do not yet have the ability to accurately forecast the magnitude of these environmental impacts over the long term, which is what really counts. Nor have we developed the technical competence at this point to make satisfactory estimates. However, environmentalists who have seriously considered weather modification suggest minimal measureable effects for most short-term (5-year or less) weather changes. Increased rainfall might encourage forage production that benefits both domestic livestock and herbivorous wildlife, while at the same time adversely impacting on the habitats of other animals. Since the beginning of cloud seeding in the 1940s, silver iodide has been used as the seeding agent in most programs. While there are uncertainties about 'the potential long-run environmental impacts of silver iodide, the evidence seems to indicate that any adverse effects would be long-term, selective, and subtle. Silveriodide seeding represents an imperceptible environmental hazard at this time. Economic Issues In seeking to estimate and evaluate economic benefits, one finds little comprehensive data on regionwide weather-economic relationships. It is difficult to make economic assessments of weather modification in conventional benefit/ cost terms when both physical capability to modify the weather and the period when the capability reaches operational status are uncertain and are themselves partially dependent on the level and quality of the research investment. Not that the situation is uniquevery few of the technological achievements that have sparked the economic growth of the United States would have stood the test of a static benefit/cost study in the first tentative stages of their development. Serious study of the socioeconomic aspects of weather modification has, hence, been limited. The better studies have considered the presumed costs, including the R&D, as well as the benefits. The more authoritative studies, have, however, given general dimensions to the economic impacts of various potential modification capabilities. These studies reveal that the economic sector that will benefit most from a weather modification capability will obviously be agriculture. The single most valuable change in the foreseeable future is more growing season precipitation, especially at opportune times. Basically, if agricultural production were increased by weather modification, all food consumers in the United States would be beneficiaries. The overall impact would tend to be anti-inflationary. However, changing the weather could produce a complex series of impacts providing benefits to many, and losses to other sectors of the economy such as construc The myriad impacts produced by urban modified weather at St. Louis, and specifically those attributed to locally increased summer rainfall and storms (from Summary of METROMEX, Volume 1: Weather Anomalies and Impacts). Water-oriented recreation can be enhanced through proper amounts of precipitation, at proper times. |