From the ECMWF is kicking your butt department: This legislation directs NOAA to prioritize its research
House Approves Weather Forecasting Bill
WASHINGTON- The U.S House of Representatives today unanimously approved the Senate amendment to H.R. 353, the Weather Research and Forecasting Innovation Act, introduced by Science, Space, and Technology Committee Vice Chair Frank Lucas (R-Okla.). This legislation directs the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) to prioritize its research to improve weather data, modelling, computing, forecasting, and warnings.
Vice Chairman Lucas: “When a major storm or tornado is quickly approaching your community, every additional minute of preparation time counts. This legislation strengthens our country’s commitment to severe weather forecasting and ensures NOAA has access to the best weather data. I am proud the bill also includes a dedicated Tornado Warning Improvement Program that will help develop detection and notification systems.
“The Weather Research and Forecasting Innovation Act is a major step toward more accurate and timely weather predictions, and I am eager to see these life-saving policies signed into law soon.”
Chairman Lamar Smith (R-Texas): “Today we took a major step to transform our nation’s weather forecasting. The Weather Research and Forecasting Innovation Act will enable new weather research, models, and technologies to better protect lives and property. With this bipartisan effort, we will improve forecasting by looking to the private sector for new technologies and weather solutions. This bill gives NOAA a clear vision and allows them the flexibility to buy new, affordable, and potentially better sources of data. With more and better options, we can finally make needed improvements to our weather forecasting capabilities. I look forward to the president signing this critical legislation so that we can make our weather industry great again.”
Background
This legislation is the product of a bipartisan effort. It directs the NOAA administrator to focus resources and effort to:
- Prioritize NOAA research on next generation weather data, modeling, and computing;
- Emphasize developing much more accurate forecasts and longer warning times for high impact weather events;
- Support proactive technology transfer of weather research into operations to protect lives and property;
- Create focused programs to extend warning lead times and improve forecasts for tornadoes and hurricanes specifically;
- Develop a plan to utilize observing system simulation experiments and innovative technology to regain U.S. superiority in weather modeling and forecasts;
- Employ new commercial data options and private sector weather solutions; and
- Enhance coordination among various federal government weather stakeholders.
The legislation also authorizes and extends a NOAA pilot program already under way thanks to a partnership between the House Science and the House Appropriations Committees. Under this pilot program, NOAA has already issued two contracts to procure commercial satellite weather data. This pilot program could bring about a paradigm shift in how NOAA makes decisions about future procurement of critical weather data and systems.
Forecasters have seen for several years now that the European ECMWF forecast model has routinely outperformed U.S. Forecast models. For example, the ECMWF model correctly projected Hurricane Sandy’s left turn into the New Jersey coast about a week in advance, whereas the US based GFS model didn’t project that path change until the storm was much closer to the East Coast.
“What the European modeling community is doing is just amazing,” Ryan Maue, a meteorologist with WeatherBell, told Ars. “This is the golden age of weather forecasters. It’s an absolute wonder of computer modeling technology.” source
Part of the problem is that NOAA has put too much funding priority on climate forecast models, that’s about to change, dramatically, since climate models aren’t verifiable until years later, and offer no short term operational usefulness to the United States economy or safety.
From UCAR today:
“This landmark legislation will save lives and property while providing business leaders with critical intelligence,” said Antonio J. Busalacchi, president of the University Corporation for Atmospheric Research (UCAR). “Today’s bipartisan vote underscores the enduring value of scientific research to our nation.”
The Weather Research and Forecasting Innovation Act is the first major weather legislation since the early 1990s. It calls for more research into subseasonal to seasonal prediction, a priority for business and community leaders who need more reliable predictions of weather patterns weeks to months in advance. The bill also will strengthen short-term weather forecasts and smooth the way for research findings to be adopted by forecasters and commercial weather companies.
More: https://www2.ucar.edu/atmosnews/news/126206/ucar-praises-passage-weather-research-and-forecasting-innovation-act
UCAR may not be so enthusiastic when they see how much their climate programs get hammered.
Moshers link: http://www.ecmwf.int/sites/default/files/elibrary/2016/16901-ecrad-new-radiation-scheme-ifs.pdf
The abstract states the new radiation model is using improved cloud handling.
Do you now accept it is ‘clouds are more important than CO2?’
It is flexible, allowing the spectral resolution, the description of cloud and aerosol optical properties, and the solver, to be changed independently of one another……
…changing the width and shape of the sub-grid cloud water distribution, and for the first time representing 3D radiative effects.
The summary contains something you do not see in climate models: “measurable increase in forecast skill” they are increasing the accuracy of short term forecasts…
Looks like a solid bit of work and they do not mention CO2 once!
Co2 has nothing to look for in a weather model. Since the weather model assumes shorter time frames, this would be completely meaningless, because neither CO2 nor the resulting radiation changes so quickly. But what changes very quickly and often several times a day is cloud cover. This is already of great importance in the weather forecast, be it temperatures or developments on fronts or at all much depends on the weather forecast at the cloud cover. The solar input is easy to predict, but the elimination of this input by clouds is very difficult to predict. Therefore, every weather model is all the better as the cloud cover can predict and take into account.
And I also have to break a lance for GFS. It is not so that EZ is always and in any case better than GFS. On a shorter period, up to 3 days, GFS is even superior to EZ. Above all, the high-resolution (0.5 degrees, 1 degree) runs of GFS are better. In addition, GFS can better record changes in the medium-term since it runs four times a day, while EZ only twice. As you see, all its two sides of the coin.
“Looks like a solid bit of work and they do not mention CO2 once!”
Got get RRTM. READ THE FRICKIN CODE.
Do you even know what radiative transfer is?
here a cartoon version for you
http://rtweb.aer.com/rrtm_description.html
modeled molecular absorbers are: water vapor, carbon dioxide, ozone, nitrous oxide, methane, oxygen, nitrogen and halocarbons.
fluxes calculated by RRTM agree with those computed by LBLRTM within 1.5 W/m2 at all levels, and the computed cooling rates agree to within 0.1 K/day in the troposphere and 0.3 K/day in the stratosphere (see above plot).
“READ THE FRIKIN CODE”
My God you’re a computer programmer – that means you understand climate?
No – it means you understand climate models.
Modelling a column of air is a start but it’s still not climate.
Do you even know what dissipative structures are?
Do you even know what Prigogine’s nonlinear thermodynamics was all about?
Do you even know what the nonlinear Lyapunov stability of clouds is?
Do you even know what the emergent nonlinear dynamics of a rotating fluid layer (e.g. the ocean) are?
Do you even know what photosynthesis is?
All of the above consign to insignificance your FRIKIN radiative transfer.
It’s not just getting the warning out earlier, it’s also avoiding false alerts.
Too many false alerts and people start to ignore the warnings.
One should not establish a weather model by failing an event. The next time the other fails. The quality of weather models is measured on longer time scales and on larger geographical covers. E.g. Northern hemisphere or southern hemisphere.
This is good news — there was some risk that the doom-mongering by climate activist-scientists had so soured Congress that they would “throw the baby out with the dirty bathwater” in NOAA funding. Instead they have done the right thing — increased focus on weather forecasting.
Kudos to Congress (and, boy, has it been a long time since I’ve been able to say that!)
Sanity returns cyclically, just like the AMO.
As opposed to Minbari, who go mad as a whole but only return to sanity individually.
Is ARGO funded through NOAA? We should support the ARGO project since the oceans will eventually integrate the heat over time and are key to understanding the climate. This is basic research.