[Senate Hearing 110-1196]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 110-1196
NATIONAL IMPERATIVES FOR EARTH
SCIENCE RESEARCH
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
SUBCOMMITTEE ON SPACE, AERONAUTICS, AND RELATED SCIENCES
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE,
SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED TENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
MARCH 7, 2007
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
78-568 PDF WASHINGTON : 2013
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing
Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; DC
area (202) 512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC
20402-0001
SENATE COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION
ONE HUNDRED TENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
DANIEL K. INOUYE, Hawaii, Chairman
JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER IV, West TED STEVENS, Alaska, Vice Chairman
Virginia JOHN McCAIN, Arizona
JOHN F. KERRY, Massachusetts TRENT LOTT, Mississippi
BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON, Texas
BARBARA BOXER, California OLYMPIA J. SNOWE, Maine
BILL NELSON, Florida GORDON H. SMITH, Oregon
MARIA CANTWELL, Washington JOHN ENSIGN, Nevada
FRANK R. LAUTENBERG, New Jersey JOHN E. SUNUNU, New Hampshire
MARK PRYOR, Arkansas JIM DeMINT, South Carolina
THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware DAVID VITTER, Louisiana
CLAIRE McCASKILL, Missouri JOHN THUNE, South Dakota
AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota
Margaret L. Cummisky, Democratic Staff Director and Chief Counsel
Lila Harper Helms, Democratic Deputy Staff Director and Policy Director
Margaret Spring, Democratic General Counsel
Christine D. Kurth, Republican Staff Director, and General Counsel
Kenneth R. Nahigian, Republican Deputy Staff Director, and Chief
Counsel
------
SUBCOMMITTEE ON SPACE, AERONAUTICS, AND RELATED SCIENCES
BILL NELSON, Florida, Chairman KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON, Texas,
JOHN F. KERRY, Massachusetts Ranking
BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota TRENT LOTT, Mississippi,
MARK PRYOR, Arkansas JOHN E. SUNUNU, New Hampshire
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Hearing held on March 7, 2007.................................... 1
Statement of Senator Nelson...................................... 1
Witnesses
Brown, Ph.D., Otis D., Dean, Rosenstiel School of Marine and
Atmospheric Science, University of Miami; Member, Committee on
Earth Science and Applications from Space, National Research
Council, The National Academies................................ 24
Prepared statement........................................... 8
Colleton, Nancy, President, Institute for Global Environmental
Strategies; Executive Director, Alliance for Earth Observations 26
Prepared statement........................................... 14
Freilich, Dr. Michael H., Director, Earth Science Division,
Science Mission Directorate, National Aeronautics and Space
Administration................................................. 23
Prepared statement........................................... 10
Moore III, Ph.D., Berrien, Distinguished Professor and Director,
Institute for the Study of Earth, Oceans, and Space, University
of New Hampshire; Co-Chair, Committee on Earth Science and
Applications from Space, National Research Council, The
National Academies............................................. 22
Prepared statement........................................... 3
NATIONAL IMPERATIVES FOR EARTH SCIENCE RESEARCH
----------
WEDNESDAY, MARCH 7, 2007
U.S. Senate,
Subcommittee on Space, Aeronautics, and Related
Sciences,
Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation,
Washington, DC.
The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:38 p.m. in
room SR-253, Russell Senate Office Building. Hon. Bill Nelson,
Chairman of the Subcommittee, presiding.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. BILL NELSON,
U.S. SENATOR FROM FLORIDA
Senator Nelson. Good afternoon, and thank you all for
coming. This is not a hearing on global warming, because the
jury is already in and the conclusions have been overwhelming.
There's almost near-unanimity of the world's leading scientists
that the climate is changing, and we are responsible.
It is especially sensitive for my state for the obvious
reasons of being a peninsula with more coastline than any other
state in the continental United States.
So, today we're going to examine the more specific issue of
whether you scientists have the tools that you need to monitor
our fragile planet, and to study how what we're doing as humans
is affecting it.
This is simply a time in which we cannot afford any
mistakes. For more than 40 years, NASA has developed satellites
to study this planet, and they have ever-increasing accuracy.
Go back to the 1960's TIROS satellites, those fuzzy views have
now turned to the high-quality views that we have today. Space
has clearly turned out to be the best vantage point from which
we can study and observe this planet.
We depend on these instruments, certainly to forecast our
weather. If anybody ever doubts the utility of those
instruments, just wait until you have an inbound hurricane, and
you're absolutely glued to either the website of NOAA, the
Weather Channel, or the local channel, that's giving you these
accurate satellite views, along with NOAA's predictions from
the National Hurricane Center.
We depend on these instruments to forecast the weather, to
predict and respond to natural disasters, and to study our
climate and the Earth's ecosystems. They even help us measure
the effects of land-use, deforestation, and pollution. NASA's
history is filled with successful missions, like Landsat, and
the Earth Observing System.
Just a week ago, during our recess, I took off to Latin
America visiting with several heads of state on a mission to
build our relationships in that region of the world and
throughout the Western Hemisphere.
But one of the things that I wanted to do en route from
having seen the President of Ecuador, going to see the
President of Peru, was to go to the rainforest. There wasn't
any sense of me going to the rainforest in Brazil, because they
were all off at Carnival. But, they were available in the
rainforest in the east of the Andes in Peru. I wanted to see
for myself the destruction of the rainforest, in this case the
uplands of the rainforest. On the sides of those mountains
there was destruction, not so much for logging, but for the
growing of coca and other plants, and legitimate crops.
I shared with them that I became interested in
deforestation 21 years ago, when I looked out the window of a
spacecraft, coming across South America when, with the naked
eye, I could see the destruction of the rainforest, because of
the color contrast 203 miles away on the surface of the Earth
below. In the same window of the spacecraft, I could look to
the east, and see the result of the destruction of the
rainforest. At the mouth of the Amazon the waters of the
Atlantic were discolored for hundreds of miles out in the
Atlantic from the additional silt.
I want to understand that. I want to understand also, and
this Committee wants to understand, how you all can help us
understand so much of this delicate, fragile, but extremely
beautiful place we call home that is suspended out in the
middle of nothing.
Today there is a reason for concern, for what my naked eye
saw 21 years ago, and what my naked eye saw a week and a half
ago on the sides of those lower Eastern Andes. We've tried to
adjust to all of this, and we have a next-generation weather
and earth satellite system, NPOESS--it's in trouble.
The project is billions of dollars over budget, it's years
behind schedule, and the key climate science instruments have
been thrown overboard to keep the program alive. And while the
President's 2008 budget request does include a miniscule
increase, spending on Earth Science peaked in 2000, and has
since decreased by 25 percent.
Likewise, the number of Earth Science missions and
instruments peaked earlier this decade, and is now in a slow
decline. The President's request this year is a billion and a
half for these Earth Science projects, and you all would like
them to be $2 billion. I want to hear from you, the Committee
wants to hear from you.
This is not so much a problem of misplaced priorities, but
rather, NASA is being asked to do too much with too little. And
in this tough budget environment, it's tough to get these
colleagues, it's tough to get them here to a hearing, it's
tough to get them to join in supporting the program recommended
by the Decadal Survey. Not at the expense of the other
priorities, but by giving NASA the resources it needs to
accomplish all of its vital missions.
So, I want to welcome Dr. Freilich, Dr. Moore, Dr. Brown,
Ms. Colleton. We're going to do something a little bit
different. I'm going to take all of your prepared texts, they
will be a part of the record. We're just going to have a
conversation. When some of the other Senators come, I'll just
stop and I'll let them jump right in. What we want to do is to
get the maximum benefit of your thinking on what we should do.
[The prepared statements of the witnesses follow:]
Prepared Statement of Berrien Moore III, Ph.D., Distinguished Professor
and Director, Institute for the Study of Earth, Oceans, and Space,
University of New Hampshire; Co-Chair, Committee on Earth Science and
Applications from Space, National Research Council, The National
Academies
Mr. Chairman, Ranking Minority Member, and members of the
Committee: thank you for inviting me here to testify today. My name is
Berrien Moore, and I am a professor of systems research at the
University of New Hampshire and Director of the Institute for the Study
of Earth, Oceans, and Space. I appear today in my capacity as co-chair
of the National Research Council (NRC)'s Committee on Earth Science and
Applications from Space: A Community Assessment and Strategy for the
Future.
The National Research Council is the unit of the National Academies
that is responsible for organizing independent advisory studies for the
Federal Government on science and technology. In response to requests
from NASA, NOAA, and the USGS, the NRC has recently completed a
``Decadal Survey'' of Earth Science and Applications from space.
(``Decadal surveys'' are the 10-year prioritized roadmaps that the NRC
has done for 40 years for the astronomers; this is the first time it is
being done for Earth Science and Applications from space.) Among the
key tasks in the charge to the Decadal Survey committee were to:
Develop a consensus of the top-level scientific questions
that should provide the focus for Earth and environmental
observations in the period 2005-2020; and
Develop a prioritized list of recommended space programs,
missions, and supporting activities to address these questions.
The NRC survey committee has prepared an extensive report in
response to this charge, which I am pleased to be able to summarize
here today. Over 100 leaders in the Earth Science community
participated on the survey steering committee or its seven study
panels. It is noteworthy that this was the first Earth Science Decadal
Survey, and the Committee and panel members did an excellent job in
fulfilling the charge and establishing a consensus--a task many
previously considered impossible. A copy of the full report has also
been provided for your use.
The Committee's vision is encapsulated in the following
declaration, first stated in the Committee's April 2005 Interim Report:
\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ NRC, Earth Science and Applications from Space: Urgent Needs
and Opportunities to Serve the Nation, The National Academies Press,
Washington, D.C., 2005. Also available online at http://www.nap.edu/
catalog/11281.html.
``Understanding the complex, changing planet on which we live,
how it supports life, and how human activities affect its
ability to do so in the future is one of the greatest
intellectual challenges facing humanity. It is also one of the
most important challenges for society as it seeks to achieve
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
prosperity, health, and sustainability.''
As detailed in the Committee's final report, and as we were
profoundly reminded by the latest report from the International Panel
on Climate Change (IPCC), the world faces significant and profound
environmental challenges: shortages of clean and accessible freshwater,
degradation of terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems, increases in soil
erosion, changes in the chemistry of the atmosphere, declines in
fisheries, and above all the rapid pace of substantial changes in
climate. These changes are not isolated; they interact with each other
and with natural variability in complex ways that cascade through the
environment across local, regional, and global scales. Addressing these
societal challenges requires that we confront key scientific questions
related to ice sheets and sea level change, large-scale and persistent
shifts in precipitation and water availability, transcontinental air
pollution, shifts in ecosystem structure and function in response to
climate change, impacts of climate change on human health, and
occurrence of extreme events, such as hurricanes, floods and droughts,
heat waves, earthquakes, and volcanic eruptions.
Yet at a time when the need has never been greater, we are faced
with an Earth observation program that will dramatically diminish in
capability over the next 5-10 years.
The Interim Report described how satellite observations have been
critical to scientific efforts to understand the Earth as a system of
connected components, including the land, oceans, atmosphere,
biosphere, and solid-Earth. It also gave examples of how these
observations have served the nation, helping to save lives and protect
property, strengthening national security, and contributing to the
growth of our economy \2\ through provision of timely environmental
information. The Interim Report documented that NASA had canceled,
scaled back, or delayed at least six planned missions (Table 1),
including a Landsat continuity mission. This led to the main finding in
the Interim Report: ``this system of environmental satellites is at
risk of collapse.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ It has been estimated that one third of the $10 trillion U.S.
economy is weather-sensitive or environment-sensitive (NRC, Satellite
Observations of the Earth's Environment: Accelerating the Transition of
Research to Operations, The National Academies Press, Washington, D.C.,
2003).
Table 1.--Canceled, Descoped, or Delayed Earth Observation Missions
[From the April 2005 Pre-Publication of the Interim Report of the
Decadal Survey on Earth Science and Applications from Space]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mission Measurement Societal benefit Status
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Global Precipitation Reduced Delayed
Precipitati vulnerability to
on floods and
Measurement droughts;
(GPM) improved
capability to
manage water
resources in arid
regions; improved
forecasts of
hurricanes.
Atmospheric Temperature and Protection of life Canceled
Soundings water vapor and property
from through improved
Geostationa weather forecasts
ry Orbit and severe storm
(GIFTS--Geo warnings.
stationary
Imaging
Fourier
Transform
Spectromete
r)
Ocean Vector Wind speed and Improved severe Canceled
Winds direction near weather warnings
(active the ocean surface to ships at sea;
scatteromet improved crop
er follow- planning and
on to yields through
QuikSCAT) better
predictions of El
Nino.
Landsat Data Land cover Monitoring of Canceled
Continuity- deforestation;
-bridge identification of
mission (to mineral
fill gap resources;
between tracking of the
Landsat-7 conversion of
and NPOESS) agricultural land
to other uses.
Glory Optical properties Improved Canceled
of aerosols; scientific
solar irradiance understanding of
factors that
force climate
change.
Wide Swath Sea level in two Monitoring of Instrument
Ocean dimensions coastal currents, canceled--descope
Altimeter eddies, and of an enhanced
(on the tides, all of OSTM
Ocean which affect
Surface fisheries,
Topography navigation, and
Mission, ocean climate.
OSTM)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Since the publication of the Interim Report, the Hydros and Deep
Space Climate Observatory missions were canceled; the flagship Global
Precipitation Mission was delayed for another two and a half years;
significant cuts were made to NASA's Research and Analysis program; the
NPOESS Preparatory Project mission was delayed for a year and a half; a
key atmospheric profiling sensor planned for the next generation of
NOAA geostationary satellites was canceled; and cost overruns led to
the NPOESS program undergoing a ``Nunn-McCurdy'' review. The
recertified NPOESS program delays the first launch by 3 years,
eliminates 2 of the planned 6 spacecraft, and de-manifests or de-scopes
a number of instruments, with particular consequences for measurement
of the forcing and feedbacks that need to be measured to understand the
magnitude, pace, and consequences of global and regional climate
change.
It is against this backdrop that I discuss the present report.
The Decadal Survey presents a vision for the Earth Science program;
an analysis of the existing Earth observing system and recommendations
to help restore its capabilities; an assessment of and recommendations
for new observations and missions needed for the next decade; an
examination of and recommendations concerning effective application of
those observations; and an analysis of how best to sustain that
observation and applications system. A critical element of the study's
vision is its emphasis on the need to place the benefits to society
that can be provided by an effective Earth observation system on a par
with scientific advancement.
The integrated suite of space missions and supporting and
complementary activities that are described in our report will support
the development of numerous applications of high importance to society.
The expected benefits of the fully-implemented program include:
Human Health
More reliable forecasts of infectious and vector-borne disease
outbreaks for disease control and response.
Earthquake Early Warning
Identification of active faults and prediction of the likelihood of
earthquakes to enable effective investment in structural
improvements, inform land-use decisions, and provide early
warning of impending earthquakes.
Weather Prediction
Longer-term, more reliable weather forecasts.
Sea Level Rise
Climate predictions based on better understanding of ocean
temperature and ice sheet volume changes and feedback to enable
effective coastal community planning.
Climate Prediction
Robust estimates of primary climate forcings for improved climate
forecasts, including local predictions of the effects of
climate change; determination in time and space of sources and
sinks of carbon dioxide.
Freshwater Availability
More accurate and longer-term precipitation and drought forecasts
to improve water resource management.
Ecosystem Services
More reliable land-use, agricultural, and ocean productivity
forecasts to improve planting and harvesting schedules and
fisheries management.
Air Quality
More reliable air quality forecasts to enable effective urban
pollution management.
Extreme Storm Warnings
Longer-term, more reliable storm track forecasts and
intensification predictions to enable effective evacuation
planning.
I will now turn to a brief discussion of the budgetary implications
of our recommendations.
The President's FY08 budget request for NASA Earth Science is a
mixture of some good news and bad news. The primary bit of good news is
the small bottom line increases for 2008 and 2009. These increases
address the needs of currently planned missions already in development,
the completion of which is consistent with the Decadal Survey's
baseline set of assumptions.
Unfortunately, the out-year budgets reveal fundamental flaws in the
budget and NASA's Earth Science plans--the budgets are totally
inadequate to accomplish the Decadal Survey's recommendations. In 2010,
the Earth Science budget begins to decline again and reaches a 20-year
low, in real terms, in 2012. This decline reflects that the 2008 budget
contains no provision for new missions, nor does it allow us to address
the significant challenges facing our planet. These disturbing broad
budgetary trends are captured in Figure 1.
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Figure 1: The NASA Earth Science Budget in constant FY06 dollars
(normalized for full-cost accounting across entire timescale; assumes 3
percent/year inflation from 2006 to 2012). Mission supporting
activities include Earth Science Research, Applied Sciences, Education
and Outreach, and Earth Science Technology.
Before turning to NOAA, I want to emphasize that the problems in
the out-years appear to be due entirely to the lack of adequate
resources. In fact, at a NASA town hall meeting that followed the
release of our report on January 15, 2007 at the 2007 annual meeting of
the American Meteorological Society, the head of NASA's Earth Science
program, who appears today with me as a witness, stated that the
recommendations in our report provided the roadmap for the Earth
Science program we should have.
The NOAA NESDIS budget picture is also a mixture of some good and
bad news. In this case, the budget takes a small downturn in FY08,
followed by significant growth in FY09-FY10, before turning down again
in FY11 (Figure 2). It remains to be seen whether this $200 M/year
growth in FY09 and FY10 can enable restoration of some of the lost
capabilities to NPOESS and GOES-R. There appears to be no budgetary
wedge for new starts. Finally, for a variety of reasons, the NOAA
NESDIS budget is far from transparent, especially in the out-years.
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Figure 2: The NOAA NESDIS Budget in constant 2006 dollars (assumes
3 percent/year inflation from 2006-2012). Mission supporting activities
include NOAA's Data Centers and Information Services, Data System
Enhancements, Data Exploitation, and Information Services, and
Facilities and Critical Infrastructure Improvements.
As detailed in our report, between 2006 and the end of the decade,
the number of operating U.S. missions will decrease dramatically and
the number of operating sensors and instruments on NASA spacecraft,
most of which are well past their nominal lifetimes, may decrease by
some 35 percent. If present trends continue, reductions of some 50
percent are possible by 2015.
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Were this to pass, we would have chosen, in effect, to partially
blind ourselves at a time of increasing need to monitor, predict, and
develop responses to numerous global environmental challenges. Vital
climate records, such as the measurement of solar irradiance and the
Earth's response, will be placed in jeopardy or lost. Measurements of
aerosols, ozone profiles, sea surface height, sources and sinks of
important greenhouse gases, patterns of air and coastal pollution, and
even winds in the atmosphere are among the numerous critical
measurements that are at risk or simply will not occur if we follow the
path of the President 2008 budget and the proposed out-year run out.
Taking this path, we will also forgo the economic benefits that
would have come, for example, from better management of energy and
water, and improved weather predictions.\3\ Without action on the
report's recommendations, a decades-long improvements in the skill in
which we make weather forecasts will stall, or even reverse; this may
be accompanied by diminished capacity to forecast severe weather events
and manage disaster response and relief efforts. The nation's
capabilities to forecast space weather will also be at risk, with
impacts on commercial aviation and space technology.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ In a typical hurricane season, NOAA's forecasts, warnings, and
the associated emergency responses result in a $3 billion savings. Two-
thirds of this savings, $2 billion, is attributed to the reduction in
hurricane-related deaths, and one-third of this savings, $1 billion, is
attributed to a reduction in property-related damage because of
preparedness actions. Advances in satellite information, data
assimilation techniques, and more powerful computers to run more
sophisticated numerical models, have lead to more accurate weather
forecasts and warnings. Today, NOAA's five-day hurricane forecasts,
which utilize satellite data, are as accurate as its three-day
forecasts were 10 years ago. The additional advanced notice has a
significant positive effect on many sectors of our economy. See
statement and references therein of Edward Morris, Director, Office of
Space Commercialization, NOAA, Hearing on Space and U.S. National
Power, Committee on Armed Services Subcommittee on Strategic Forces,
U.S. House of Representatives, June 21, 2006. Available at: http://
www.legislative.noaa.gov/Testimony/morris
062106.pdf.
\4\ Ibid.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The world is facing significant environmental challenges: shortages
of clean and accessible freshwater, degradation of terrestrial and
aquatic ecosystems, increases in soil erosion, changes in the chemistry
of the atmosphere, declines in fisheries, and the likelihood of
significant changes in climate. These changes are occurring over and
above the stresses imposed by the natural variability of a dynamic
planet, as well as the effects of past and existing patterns of
conflict, poverty, disease, and malnutrition. Further, these changes
interact with each other and with natural variability in complex ways
that cascade through the environment across local, regional, and global
scales. To cope responsibly with these challenges requires information
about our planet; it requires us to expand our scientific basis for
foreseeing potential changes and patterns, and this science is
dependent upon expanded space-based observation. The needed new
missions are set forth in the Decadal Survey; these missions need to be
implemented in the coming decade.
I would like to thank the Committee for inviting me to testify, and
I would be delighted to answer any questions.
______
Prepared Statement of Otis B. Brown, Ph.D., Dean, Rosenstiel School of
Marine and Atmospheric Science, University of Miami; Member, Committee
on Earth Science and Applications from Space, National Research
Council, The National Academies
Mr. Chairman, Ranking Minority Member, and members of the
Committee: thank you for inviting me here to testify today. My name is
Otis Brown, and I am Dean of the Rosenstiel School of Marine and
Atmospheric Science, University of Miami. I am also a member of the
National Research Council's Committee on Earth Science and Applications
from Space.
As dean of the Rosenstiel School, I have first-hand experience how
satellite observations provide real-world results. Following Hurricane
Katrina, imagery from our Center for Southeastern Tropical Advanced
Remote Sensing (CSTARS) assisted relief and recovery efforts in New
Orleans, tracking to see when and where flood waters had receded to
increase the effectiveness of rescue efforts. Also pertinent to the
environmental challenges presenting themselves in the Gulf states, we
employed satellite imagery that identifies the rate of subsidence in
the Mississippi Delta and New Orleans--equally invaluable information
when making decisions about the reality and requirements of rebuilding
in this area and long-term environmental challenges. This same imagery
is what we use to monitor water levels in the Everglades and outbreaks
of red tide. And, uses for satellite data only continue to grow as we
learn to ``see'' phenomena like changes in sea surface temperature, sea
level, and the size of polar ice caps. I cannot emphasize enough how
vital satellite imagery has become to earth observation and
consequently our ability to predict, plan, prepare, and respond.
I've been asked to discuss my perspectives on the ``National
Imperatives for Earth Sciences Research.'' This topic includes areas
relevant to many parts of the Federal Government. My testimony today
focuses on the roles of NASA and NOAA. It also addresses some resource
and coordination issues for these two agencies.
As you may know I have been part of the team that recently produced
a decadal plan for Earth observations from space, which provides a
prioritized roadmap. Our vision is captured in the following
declaration:
Understanding the complex, changing planet on which we live,
how it supports life, and how human activities affect its
ability to do so in the future is one of the greatest
intellectual challenges facing humanity. It is also one of the
most important challenges for society as it seeks to achieve
prosperity, health, and sustainability.
As detailed in the NRC report, and further emphasized by the latest
report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), our
planet is faced with a number of significant scientific and societal
challenges and their impacts on key parts of our society, economy, and
health. The two-year study contained in the NRC report delineates how
NASA's Earth Science budget has declined 30 percent since 2000, with
more funding reductions planned as its priority missions of manned
trips to Mars and a station on the Moon take further hold. The National
Ocean and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) likewise faces funding
challenges with its National Polar-orbiting Operational Environmental
Satellite System (NPOESS)--now 3 years behind schedule and $3 billion
over budget. Additionally, many of the satellite system's advanced
weather and climate instruments have been dropped to address cost and
schedule challenges. Meanwhile, current satellites continue to age, and
many of us foresee major shortcomings in satellite observations by the
end of this decade that will undo much of the progress we have made in
Earth observation and weather prediction.
So, at a time when our need for understanding the Earth system and
the need for Earth observations have never been greater, we are faced
with declining investments in Earth Science, and, an Earth observation
program that will significantly diminish in capability over the next
decade.
The first question the National Research Council committee had to
address was the national capabilities for Earth observations. We were
troubled by the answer.
We found that the current investment strategies had led to a system
at risk of collapse. That assessment was based on the observed decline
in funding for Earth observation missions in NASA and the consequent
cancellation, downsizing, and delay of a number of critical missions
and instruments in both agencies. Since the interim report, matters
have only worsened, with further cancellations, descopings and delays
of NOAA and NASA satellite plans. This will result in an overall
degradation of the network of Earth observing satellites.
There are many potential consequences. Some examples are:
Weather forecasts and warnings may become less accurate,
putting more people at risk and diminishing the proven economic
value of accurate forecasts--this is particularly important to
this country since we must cope with many forms of extreme
weather, be it in the form of hurricanes, tornadoes, drought,
floods or winter storms.
Climate variability and the rate of change need to be better
quantified. Earth is warming because of a small imbalance
between incoming solar radiation and outgoing radiation from
Earth. Without the recommended measurements, we will not be
able to quantify how this net energy imbalance is changing, or
when or if the planet will stop warming.
Climate models have improved steadily over the years, but
are far from perfect and must be improved if we are to
intelligently cope with climate change. Satellites provide
unique observations of the Earth system and validate and
improve these models.
Sea level is rising and glaciers and ice-fields around the
world are melting, but we just don't know how fast these are
occurring. Without continuing quantitative observations
provided via satellites, we can't know how these rates change
or the implications for coastal communities.
Satellite observations could well be pivotal in resolving a
controversy about whether the frequency and intensity of
hurricanes are increasing; observations of the atmosphere and
oceans are essential.
The limited signals of cataclysmic activity come through
vigilant observation. That means the risk of missing early
detection of earthquakes, tsunamis, and volcanic eruptions will
increase.
The bottom line is: Earth Science is based fundamentally on
observations. While it is impossible to predict what scientific
advances will not occur without the observations, or what
surprises we will miss, we can be sure the rate of scientific
progress will be greatly slowed--perhaps even undone to some
degree. Without a doubt, it takes us backward rather than
forwards.
Significant advances in hurricane forecasting over the past three
decades have come from orbiting satellites that take timely, high-
resolution pictures and provide improved estimates of surface wind over
the ocean. The satellite images are all over the TV for the public to
view, but scientists, dissect them further. From sea level, sea surface
temperatures and winds to red tide outbreaks and oil spills, satellite
observations afford us a better, informed view of our Earth.
The climate debate has been driven by debate over model
capabilities and the lack of long-term critical observations relevant
to climate. Many of the capabilities to make such observations exist in
the research domain, but have not been transitioned into an operational
setting. Our NRC report noted the difficulties in transferring NASA and
NOAA research into operational use. That is because there is currently
no process to include the necessary scientific input, resources and
exploitation capabilities to either facilitate or to define this
transition. Thus, we are seeing the winding down of the NASA Earth
Observing System and its broad Earth observing capabilities and
information delivery systems, with no apparent way for our Nation to
harvest the fruits of this multi-billion dollar investment, or, to
continue prototype research systems with proven operational value. The
follow-on NOAA system, NPOESS, is late and more than likely will not
overlap the NASA systems, and, most of the climate-related capabilities
are not in its baseline. Put succinctly, much needed long-term time-
series of Earth processes required for decisions in this changing world
will be lost. This is due to the lack of a functional relationship
between research (NASA) and operations (NOAA) for Earth observing
systems, and, a lack of resources in NOAA to address all of its Earth
observing requirements.
The challenge in Earth Sciences is that the breadth of study is so
large that it's difficult to develop a set of priorities across
disciplines. This is the first ever report to provide an integrated set
of national priorities for Earth observing from space. It's equally
difficult for anyone to imagine how it affects them individually. Often
times, it seems we speak in a foreign language about solar irradiance,
vector sea surface winds, limb sounding of ozone profiles and water
vapor soundings from geostationary and polar orbits--perhaps this is
not the clearest way for the public to understand how humans have
become dependent on tools that reside in outer space.
What is important to understand about the plan our committee
recommended is that its financial requirements are not astronomical. In
fact, implementing all of the recommendations requires only that we
bring the program up to funding levels comparable to the year 2000. The
plan we recommend calls for undertaking 17 new NASA and NOAA missions
in the period 2008-2020, as well as restoring some of the capabilities
lost on NPOESS and GOES, and revitalizing a few delayed NASA missions
like GPM and Landsat. Our recommendations for NASA can be implemented
in an extremely cost-effective manner. The Committee understood the
financial constraints and therefore had to find missions capable of
tackling several scientific questions simultaneously. The result is
that we reduced the number of possible new missions from more than 100
down to 17 broad-ranging, high-value, multipurpose missions. But to
accomplish this, NASA's Earth Science budget must be restored to year
2000 funding levels. We think this is very reasonable given the obvious
societal needs and benefits.
The truth of the matter is that this field of science is
inextricably linked to our daily life and that of future generations.
Climate variability and natural disasters are taking a significant toll
on our economy, our environment, and our well being. And, that is why
we must sustain the Earth observations that underpin national
preparedness and response. Implementing these missions will not only
greatly reduce the risk of natural disasters of all kinds to the people
of our country and the world, they will also support more efficient
management of natural resources including water, energy, fisheries, and
ecosystems, and support the economy. Thus, the cost of the program is
repaid many times over.
The observing system we envision is affordable and will help
establish a firm, sustainable foundation for Earth Science and real
societal benefits through the year 2020 and beyond.
Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today. I would
be pleased to answer any questions that you may have.
______
Prepared Statement of Dr. Michael H. Freilich, Director, Earth Science
Division, Science Mission Directorate, National Aeronautics and Space
Administration
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee, thank you for the
opportunity to appear today to discuss the President's FY 2008 budget
request for NASA's Earth Science program. I welcome the chance to
discuss the important area of Earth Science, especially in light of the
recently released National Research Council's Earth Science Decadal
Survey.
NASA's FY 2008 budget request includes $1.5 billion for the study
of planet Earth from space. This represents an increase of $27.7
million over the FY 2007 budget request, and will fund a wide-ranging
and balanced program of activities, including: developing, launching,
and operating Earth-observing space missions; competitively selected
research and analysis science investigations conducted by NASA and non-
NASA researchers; Applied Science projects that help other Federal and
regional agencies and organizations to efficiently use products from
NASA Earth research to advance their missions; ongoing technology
development efforts to enable the missions of the future; and,
education and public outreach programs to make our knowledge of the
Earth accessible to the world. NASA's budget request supports a
balanced program, allocating over 30 percent of NASA's request for the
Science Mission Directorate and within the Science Mission Directorate,
allocating 27 percent of funding for Earth Science.
NASA remains by far the largest single contributor to the
interagency U.S. Climate Change Science Program (CCSP). Much of the
science community's present state of knowledge about global change--
including many of the measurements and a significant fraction of the
analyses which serve as the foundation for the recent report of the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)--is derived from
NASA's Earth Science program. To list just a few examples, using data
from Earth observing satellites NASA-supported researchers are:
monitoring ice cover and ice sheet motions in the Arctic and the
Antarctic; quantifying the short-term and long-term changes to the
Earth's protective shield of stratospheric ozone, including the
positive impacts of the Montreal protocols; discovering robust
relationships between increasing upper ocean temperature and decreasing
primary production from the phytoplankton that form the base of the
oceans' food chain; and, using a fleet of satellites flying in
formation (the ``A-Train'') to make unique, global, near-simultaneous
measurements of aerosols, clouds, temperature and relative humidity
profiles, and radiative fluxes.
Our improved understanding of Earth System processes leads to
improvements in sophisticated weather and climate models, which in
turn--when initialized using the satellite data--can be used to predict
natural and human-caused changes in the Earth's environment over time
scales of hours to years.
Importantly, near-real-time measurements from NASA research
missions (including the Tropical Rainfall Mapping Mission, QuikSCAT,
the Atmospheric Infrared Sounder instrument on the Aqua mission, and
others) are used routinely by the National Oceanic Administration
(NOAA) and other U.S. and international agencies to improve weather
forecasting. Similarly, high quality measurements obtained by
operational weather satellites provide essential context for the
scientific analyses of the NASA research mission data.
As of today, NASA is operating 14 Earth observing missions. Five
more missions are quite far advanced in their development, and will be
launched in 2008 and 2009. Of these, the National Polar-orbiting
Operational Environmental Satellite System (NPOESS) Preparatory Project
(NPP) and the Ocean Surface Topography Mission (OSTM) will continue
critical Earth System and climate measurements that were initiated by
the Earth Observing System (for NPP) and the TOPEX/Poseidon and Jason-1
missions (for OSTM). The Glory mission will fly an instrument to extend
our measurements of total solar irradiance, as well as an instrument
that will provide unique, first-ever measurements of properties of
atmospheric aerosols. The Orbiting Carbon Observatory (OCO) and the
Aquarius mission will make new, first-of-a-kind global measurements of
atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations and ocean surface salinity--
both parameters of known importance to the study of climate change.
The FY 2008 budget request also funds the reconstituted Landsat
Data Continuity Mission (LDCM) for launch in 2011, and the Global
Precipitation Measurement Mission (GPM) for launch of its Core
spacecraft not later than 2013, followed a year later by launch of the
NASA GPM Constellation spacecraft. Extending the pioneering rain
measurements initiated with the joint U.S.-Japanese Tropical Rainfall
Mapping Mission, and providing a calibration standard for several other
rain-measuring instruments orbited by others, the GPM mission will
provide us with accurate, global rain measurements much more frequently
than currently possible. Knowledge of accurate rainfall rates and
atmospheric water quantities is essential for the study of the Earth's
hydrologic cycle and its sensitivity to climate change. In addition,
the GPM measurements will be used by operational weather prediction
agencies around the globe to improve weather forecasts and severe storm
predictions.
Even as we are acquiring and analyzing measurements today, we are
planning the satellites, field experiments, scientific investigations,
and Earth System models of the future. The recently released Earth
Science Decadal Survey provides, for the first time, a scientifically
based, community consensus statement of the top priority future Earth
System Science problems to be addressed, and it suggests a sequence of
notional missions whose measurements could contribute to advancing our
understanding of the Earth and its environment.
We welcome the Decadal Survey--indeed, we asked for it. NASA, along
with NOAA and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), requested and funded
the National Research Council (NRC) to conduct this first Decadal
Survey in Earth Science. We formally made the request in the fall of
2003 and the study began in earnest in 2004. The massive undertaking
was only completed this January. We are grateful for all of the efforts
of the Co-Chairs and NRC staff, the members of the Decadal Survey
Executive Committee, and the literally hundreds of Earth Science
researchers who volunteered their time and their ideas. Their success
in creating scientific consensus across the broad and diverse Earth
Science community is a substantial achievement.
The science priorities identified by the Decadal Survey will be our
primary guide as we design and select Earth observing missions to be
flown in the next 10-15 years. In the space sciences, NASA has a long
history of guidance by NRC Decadal Surveys. Indeed, even in the Earth
Sciences where this is the first Decadal Survey, the President's FY
2008 budget request for NASA was guided by recommendations included in
the interim report issued by the Decadal Survey committee in 2005. The
FY 2008 budget request includes funding and predictable launch dates
for the Landsat Data Continuity Mission, the Glory aerosol and solar
irradiance mission, and the Global Precipitation Mission, all of which
figured strongly in the interim report.
Unfortunately, the Decadal Survey arrived too late for its specific
recommendations to influence the FY 2008 budget process, but its
scientific priorities will be used in development of the FY 2009 and
subsequent budget requests. NASA's FY 2008 budget request also includes
funding for an additional, unspecified, competed flight mission, which
will launch sometime around 2014. We will be guided by the Decadal
Survey as we choose the scientific focus and instrument complement for
this mission, starting no earlier than 2008.
In addition to its science priorities and the notional mission set,
the Decadal Survey provides several recommendations relevant to the
design and implementation of the Earth Science flight program. Survey
recommendations in the areas of international collaboration and
technology investment deserve particular consideration.
We all recognize that a constellation of missions and many
simultaneous measurements--such as those obtained by the A-Train
spacecraft described above--are needed to understand the interactions
between Earth system processes. No agency or nation can afford to
develop and fly all necessary missions single handedly.
The Decadal Survey emphatically recommends international
collaboration, to maximize humankind's benefits from our net investment
in Earth Science, and to avoid unnecessary duplication. To this end, we
have already begun discussions with our 5 closest international space
agency partners: the Canadian, European, French, Japanese, and German
space agencies. We have begun planning substantive bilateral meetings
to be held this spring, to identify and refine areas of common interest
and complementary expertise. We are also actively engaged--indeed NASA
and the U.S. are leaders--in international coordination bodies such as
the Committee on Earth Observation Satellites (CEOS) and the
international Group on Earth Observations (GEO). As with our present
OSTM, Aquarius, and GPM missions, we anticipate substantial joint
projects with international partners as we construct missions to
address the Decadal Survey's science questions.
Science-driven technology investment is one of the keys to the
design and implementation of any future mission set. It is essential to
have the technology developed and tested in a relevant environment
prior to the approval of any mission. This helps to avoid cost overruns
that occur when problems arise with a new technology late in the
mission development cycle. To foster advanced technologies for Earth
Science, NASA's strategy is two pronged as recommended by the Decadal
Survey, with both focused technology and core technology elements.
Where we know the missions we want to implement and what new
technologies are required on a certain schedule, we make focused
investments to assure technologies are available when we issue
competitive solicitations for mission formulation and development. This
is done through the highly successful Instrument Incubator Program,
funded under the Earth Science Technology Office, which matures
instrument technologies for future measurements.
The second prong addresses the seed corn or ``core technologies,''
for advanced Earth observing missions of the future. Where we know that
certain classes of technologies are needed for the types of
measurements we would like to make in the future, or are simply
convinced that investment in certain sensor or detector technology
areas will yield fruit, we will issue open, competitive solicitations
for the best ideas. Examples include advanced component development
(which allows scientists and technologists to take an idea from the
concept to the bench top demonstration stage), laser risk reduction
(which has developed fundamental lidar technologies applicable to
multiple NASA missions), and advanced information systems technology
development (which provides advanced operations technologies which aid
in reducing future mission costs).
The Decadal Survey, the U.S. Climate Change Science Program, and
NASA's own planning in Earth Science all assume the presence of an
operational system of environmental monitoring satellites that can make
climate-quality measurements. The Nation needs such a system. That is
why NASA is a member of the NPOESS governing body, and why NASA entered
into a partnership with the NPOESS Integrated Program Office to develop
the NPOESS Preparatory Project (NPP). NPP is designed both to continue
essential measurements from NASA's Earth Observing System satellites as
well as provide a demonstration of instruments to be flown on NPOESS.
The Nunn-McCurdy-certified NPOESS program, as you are aware,
focuses NPOESS on its weather mission and deletes many of the
capabilities previously planned for climate science. It is thus
important to recognize that the NRC's work is not yet done. As the
Decadal Survey Committee was finalizing its notional mission set and
sequence, the full impact of the removal of the climate sensors from
the NPOESS program was just coming to light. In discussion with the
NRC, NASA and NOAA have structured a follow-on activity wherein a
subset of the Decadal Survey Committee, augmented by others they may
deem necessary, would hold a workshop and provide input on how the
agencies might mitigate the impact of the changes to NPOESS. We expect
that the NRC workshop will take place no later than early summer, in
time to provide recommendations useful for helping to determine the
FY09 budget.
NASA is proceeding with a mission roadmapping activity to determine
the focus and content of our specific future Earth observing missions.
The roadmap will integrate the scientific recommendations and priority/
sequence of the Decadal Survey, the joint and ongoing NASA-NOAA
examinations of the NPOESS Nunn-McCurdy changes, and the contributions
of our international partners. Through a series of concept studies
conducted at NASA centers (some actually begun in anticipation of the
Decadal Survey mission suggestions), we are carefully examining the
Decadal Survey's notional missions. The studies are assessing the
technological readiness, system engineering challenges, and expected
costs (including support for scientific validation and analysis of the
mission data) of each notional missions. These concept studies are
accessing the full capability of the NASA mission design and costing
apparatus, to complement the estimates assigned by the NRC. As the
roadmap evolves, community involvement will be assured through regular
interactions with the Earth Science Subcommittee of the NASA Advisory
Council, as well as existing discipline- and science-focus theme
working groups which regularly inform our plans and examine our
progress within the NASA Earth Science Division.
The roadmapping process includes the anticipated update later this
year to the NASA Earth Science Plan. Indeed when the Congress asked the
Agency for a Science Plan in the NASA Authorization Act of 2005 (P.L.
109-155), you recognized that the Decadal Survey would not be available
in time to influence the Earth Science portion of that Plan. Therefore,
NASA was asked to describe how it might revise that Plan based on the
Earth Science Decadal Survey. The roadmapping activity and the Science
Plan will address that question.
While the scope and specificity of the roadmap clearly must exceed
that of the Decadal Survey and must accommodate issues of programmatic
balance and national needs, it is definitively not our intention to
redo the Decadal Survey or to change the scientific priorities that it
identified.
As with decadal surveys in other parts of the Science Mission
Directorate portfolio, this Decadal Survey is only the starting point
for planning. However, planning in Earth Science is even more complex
than in other divisions, given the web of partnerships and users of
Earth Science data, and its societal impact. Considering the long time
horizon in the NRC's report, it will require several budget cycles to
implement the program that we will derive from the Decadal Survey's
near- and mid-term recommended mission sets. Nevertheless, our planning
process starts with the consensus scientific priorities articulated for
us by the NRC. So I will close by re-iterating my gratitude to the
decadal survey committee Co-chairs and members for their excellent
work. NASA's commitment to Earth Science research is commensurate with
theirs.
Table 1.--NASA Earth Science Missions Currently in Development
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPOESS Preparatory Project (2009) Ensures continuity of several key
Strategic mission; Systematic climate measurements between the
measurement Earth Observing System and
NPOESS. Implementation of the
NPOESS Presidential Decision
Directive of 1994. Joint mission
with the NPOESS Integrated
Program Office.
Landsat Data Continuity Mission Ensures continuity of long-term
(2011) global land cover change data.
Strategic mission; Systematic Post-LDCM land imagery
measurement acquisition by an operational
agency is planned. Joint mission
with USGS.
Ocean Surface Topography Mission Ensures continuity of ocean
(2008) altimetry data; planned as part
Strategic mission; Systematic of a transition to operational
measurement agencies. Joint mission with
NOAA, CNES & EUMETSAT.
Glory (2008) Addresses high priority objective
Strategic mission; Initializes a of the U.S. Climate Change
systematic measurement Science Program. Measure global
aerosols & liquid cloud
properties and solar radiation.
Mandated by the Presidential
Climate Change Research
Initiative of 2001.
Orbiting Carbon Observatory (2008) Nearing completion of development.
Competed mission; Earth System First global measurement of CO2
Science Pathfinder from space; small Earth Science
mission.
Aquarius (2009) In advanced stage of development.
Competed mission; Earth System First global measurement of sea
Science Pathfinder surface salinity from space;
small Earth Science mission.
Joint mission with Argentina.
Global Precipitation Measurement Recommended by 2005 interim report
(2013) of decadal survey committee;
Strategic mission--Initializes a extend spatial coverage to global
systematic measurement and temporal coverage to every 3
hours with constellation.
Earth System Science Pathfinder; TBD Focus and relative priority to be
(2014) determined using decadal survey;
Competed mission solicitation no earlier than 2008
for 2014 launch.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
______
Prepared Statement of Nancy Colleton, President, Institute for Global
Environmental Strategies; Executive Director, Alliance for Earth
Observations
Introduction
Chairman Nelson, Ranking Member Hutchison, members of the
Committee, special guests, ladies and gentlemen, I am Nancy Colleton,
president of the Institute for Global Environmental Strategies, a non-
profit, 501(c)3 organization. Our efforts are devoted to furthering
knowledge of the Earth system and promoting the value and use of the
technology tools that help us better understand our changing planet.
The Institute's efforts include everything from developing resources
for K-12 science education and teacher professional development, to
facilitating international cooperative activities in Earth Science and
applications.
I am here today representing one of our major initiatives, the
Alliance for Earth Observations--an informal confederation of
organizations devoted to promoting Earth observations for social and
economic benefit. The Alliance has been a strong advocate of the
importance of engaging the private sector (industry, academia, and non-
governmental organizations) in the planning of Earth observation
systems, primarily the U.S. Integrated Earth Observation System (IEOS)
and the multinational Global Earth Observation System of Systems
(GEOSS).
The Alliance membership is diverse and includes stakeholders such
as system developers, data providers, geospatial technology firms,
university-based research institutes, and a non-governmental
organization that focuses on science applications for conservation.
Since our effort began in December 2003, we have implemented an
aggressive outreach effort to numerous business sectors (e.g., clean
technologies, energy, agriculture, public health) to raise awareness of
the importance of Earth observations. Attachment A includes a listing
of the Alliance members. An Alliance Public Policy Statement on the
Decadal Survey for Earth Observations is included in Attachment B.
We are here today to examine one of the most critical tools of
Earth Science: satellite observations. Whether we realize it or not, we
all work in the field of Earth Science and benefit from satellite
observations. Whether you are a policymaker, an investor, a farmer, a
fisherman, or a truck driver, the Earth is changing and it is
influencing our work, our decisions, our recreation, our resources, our
economy, and our future. I am honored to participate in this important
hearing, National Imperatives for Earth Science Research.
Response to the Report
The purpose of today's hearing is to discuss the recent National
Research Council report, Earth Science and Applications from Space:
National Imperatives for the Next Decade and Beyond. I thank Drs.
Berrien Moore and Rick Anthes on the leadership that they have provided
as co-chairs of this study. I congratulate them and the other members
of the Decadal Survey Committee on this exceptional report. As we all
know, the quality and breadth of reports such as this don't just
happen; they require a very dedicated and concerted effort.
Quoting from the report, ``the United States' extraordinary
foundation of global observations is at great risk. Between 2006 and
the end of the decade, the number of operating missions will decrease
dramatically and the number of operating sensors and instruments on
NASA spacecraft, most of which are well past their lifetimes, will
decrease by 50 percent.'' As my colleague, Governor Jim Geringer
(former Governor of Wyoming) pointed out in his testimony on this topic
on February 13th to the House Science and Technology Committee, ``That
means a fifty percent reduction in today's already inadequate space-
based information systems. . . . It is difficult to maintain your
vision from a crumbling vantage point.''
I offer four primary observations to this Senate Committee for your
consideration and deliberation:
The fact that the Decadal Survey Committee's vision for a
decadal program in Earth observations went beyond fundamental
science to consider ``increased applications to serve the
Nation and people of the world'' is a significant and much-
needed shift in approach to the U.S. program.
The U.S. should buildupon our space-based Earth observation
programs and move forward with the U.S. IEOS--incorporating
space, aircraft, and in situ instruments, and the requisite
analytical capabilities.
Clear leadership is essential to resolve the issues and
attain the goals identified in the Decadal Survey.
The time to act is now.
Increased Applications to Serve the Nation and the World
This year, we will celebrate the 20th anniversary of Our Common
Future, the groundbreaking report of the World Commission on
Environment and Development led by former Norwegian Prime Minister Gro
Harlem Brundtland. The report begins as follows:
In the middle of the 20th century, we saw our planet from space
for the first time. Historians may eventually find that this
vision had a greater impact on thought than did the Copernican
revolution of the 16th century, which upset the human self-
image by revealing that the Earth is not the centre of the
universe. From space, we see a small and fragile ball dominated
not by human activity and edifice but by a pattern of clouds,
oceans, greenery, and soils. Humanity's inability to fit its
doings into that pattern is changing planetary systems,
fundamentally. Many such changes are accompanied by life-
threatening hazards. This new reality, from which there is not
escape, must be recognized--and managed.
Fortunately, this new reality coincides with more positive
developments new to this century. We can move information and
goods faster around the globe than ever before; we can produce
more food and more goods with less investment and resources;
our technology and science gives us at least the potential to
look deeper into and better understand natural systems. From
space, we can see and study the Earth as an organism whose
health depends on the health of all its parts. We have the
power to reconcile human affairs with natural laws and to
thrive in the process. In this our cultural and spiritual
heritages can reinforce our economic interests and survival
imperatives.
It is insightful that, even in 1987, world leaders recognized that
not only would space technology help us understand the Earth, but that
it could also be a unique tool to better manage our planet for social
benefit and economic interests.
But, it is disappointing that despite this powerful text published
20 years ago, we are gathered here today for a hearing examining the
decline in U.S. space-based Earth observing capabilities.
Since that time, our U.S. systems have focused primarily on
answering scientific questions, with applications of this data and
information as a secondary objective. And, although we have seen
significant growth and impact of operational programs at the National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and the U.S. Geological
Survey (USGS), science requirements are still what drive the
development of our space-based systems.
The fact that the Decadal Survey Committee's vision for an Earth
observations decadal program went beyond fundamental science to
consider ``increased applications to serve the nations and people of
the world'' is a significant step and much-needed shift in approach to
the U.S. program.
We must recognize that the technologies that we are discussing
today are the same technologies that:
Enabled us to track and forecast Hurricane Katrina;
Enabled us to discover and visualize the ozone hole;
Allowed us to detect the impacts of the Indian Ocean tsunami
and to determine the true extent of the devastation it caused;
Continue to identify receding Arctic glaciers; and
Were used by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
in their studies.
Just last week, we again witnessed the benefit of Earth observation
satellite technology to our nation:
NOAA weather satellites provided critical lead time for the
Southeast tornadoes (in some cases 12-55 minutes); and
NASA's MODIS (Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer)
on the Aqua satellite enabled us to view the extent of dust
storms caused by high winds over Northern Texas (Dallas Morning
News and Houston Chronicle reported that downed power lines
left some 37,000 homes and businesses without power. Grass
fires were also reported).
The benefits of space-based data will not end this week or next. In
fact, the need for this type of information and the responsibility of
the United States as a world leader to maintain and share this
important capability will only increase with the stress of climate
change.
In a January 12, 2007, speech to the World Affairs Council, Lord
Levene, Chairman of Lloyd's, provided a global insurer's perspective on
catastrophe trends and climate change. He stated, ``We cannot risk
being in denial on catastrophe trends. We can expect to see U.S. mega-
catastrophes with $100 billion insured losses soon. We urgently need a
radical rethink of public policy, and to build the facts into our
future planning.'' He added, ``The insurance industry will continue to
play a vital role as enabler and rebuilder of the U.S. economy.'' U.S.
satellite assets and the products provided as a result of space-based
observations are critical to ensuring that insurance and other sectors
have accurate and timely information.
Not only should the United States strive to answer key scientific
questions, but it should respond to the needs of a broad, non-
scientific user community, which relies increasingly upon operational
missions by NOAA. By this I mean how can we ensure that our national
research program and technologies are meeting the needs of
policymakers, state and local water managers, energy executives, and
emerging areas such as the carbon finance market? This will involve
additional study and possible correction of our current research-to-
operations processes based on new engagement with the diverse and
emerging user communities to provide more input to our national
planning for new systems.
Move forward with IEOS
Former Wyoming Governor Jim Geringer, who testified to the Senate
Commerce Committee in April 2006 on drought and the need for integrated
information, also wrote in November 2006 to the Office of Management
and Budget to express the need to fund IEOS, the U.S. contribution to
the multinational Global Earth Observation System of Systems (GEOSS).
He wrote:
Sir Francis Bacon coined the phrase ``Knowledge is power.''
Today it's not about power but about empowerment as our country
faces many challenges. More than ever we need better data-
driven decisions. The first essential part is observation, the
gathering of data. But we need more than data. Accurate and
timely observations become information that leads to knowledge
that enables decisions. We must reduce uncertainty to enable
better risk management for businesses as well as protect
citizens and save lives and property.
In the December 2006-January 2007 issue of Environmental Finance
Magazine, Vijay Gudivaka reported that ``Companies are working overtime
to get a better understanding of their environmental impacts.'' The
article discusses the need for more effective environmental data
management and how companies are being challenged to develop data bases
to better assess environmental, health, and safety information.
Gudivaka writes, ``Whatever system is being used to collect and
distribute environmental information needs to keep meeting the
requirements of the business--or it has to change.''
Without an established information infrastructure that builds upon
our space-based Earth observation programs, we face many questions
currently: Are our current systems meeting the needs of our businesses?
Are our current systems protecting our citizens and property? . . .
maintaining U.S. competitiveness? . . . ensuring that public and
private sector decisionmakers, have, and will in the future have the
information they need to respond to challenges like climate change? The
Decadal Survey highlights the need to do more. My work with numerous
business, academic, and non-government leaders also reveals that our
systems must be improved to meet the requirements of business.
Warren Isom, Senior Vice President, Willis Re Inc., and Board
Member of the Weather Risk Management Association remarked at the Forum
on Earth Observations last year, ``The weather risk market--in fact the
risk-management business in general--has a profoundly strong interest
in serious, systematic attempts to improve, expand and intensify the
capture of data relating to our planet.''
The current U.S. system must change to combine and integrate the
valuable and extensive information sources and tools across all Federal
agencies. This would create the IEOS, new interoperable systems that
enable an unprecedented picture of our world, with a better
understanding of intended benefits.
The Alliance for Earth Observations believes that by embarking on
the development of IEOS that the United States will:
Give its citizens the single most important and
comprehensive technology tool to monitor and respond to our
changing world, thereby protecting lives and property;
Give its Federal leaders and managers robust observational
data and models that are fundamental to performance
measurement, decision-making, and accelerating our
understanding of environmental processes;
Provide U.S. industry with the data needed to better manage
risk and resources, make transportation decisions, create new
business opportunities in environmental information products
and services, and thereby impact long-term environmental
sustainability;
Enable our country to remain the world leader in energy
development and management, agriculture productivity, marine
transportation, public health and other areas;
Support the global community by working in partnership with
other countries to share and integrate important data and
information; and
Give future generations the knowledge and tools needed to
leave a better world for each succeeding generation.
IEOS will leverage Earth Science and technology for the benefit of
U.S. citizens and the world. In the area of climate change, IEOS would
provide accurate and timely observations as the foundation for guiding
U.S. climate change policy, ensuring our Nation is moving in the right
direction and providing the basis for knowing whether our policies are
making the intended positive impacts we expect. The National Integrated
Drought Information System (NIDIS), which is a key component of IEOS,
would provide a proactive solution for U.S. citizens, delivering the
``business intelligence'' needed to manage the risk of drought.
Regarding energy security, observations are critical to both the supply
and demand sides of energy. On the supply side, all sources of
alternative and renewable energy are highly dependent on environmental
data. These energy resources include hydropower, wind, ocean energy
(tide, current, wave), biofuels, photovoltaics, and geothermal sources.
On the demand side, environmental conditions largely determine the
overall demand for power as well as the variability in demand. By
funding the IEOS, the United States would provide a new level of
service to the American people to prevent, mitigate or manage the
effects of natural hazards through linked and interactive systems that
provide the United States and the world with greater forecasting
capability. Even in the area of public health, IEOS would lead to:
Improved air quality forecasting;
Improved and earlier recognition of harmful algal blooms;
Earlier recognition of the need for beach closures; and
A national water quality monitoring system that, for the
first time, would integrate disparate water quality systems
into one comprehensive system--a major step forward for the
United States.
IEOS benefits can only be achieved through a common U.S. integrated
information architecture. The benefits discussed in the previous
paragraphs all depend on the development of a common observation and
information system architecture for Earth observations. This
architecture would facilitate information sharing between and among
agencies as well as promulgate standards for terminology, data
discovery, data access and transport, and service interfaces. This
approach would enable our investment in environmental data, products
and services to be leveraged by many communities of interest,
generating value to both citizens and the economy through improved
decisionmaking and incubation of a value-added market for environmental
products and services. A robust and scalable architecture for an
environmental enterprise would:
Leverage federally funded activities in other data-rich
domains;
Enable communities of interest to easily and transparently
access a variety of thematically diverse and geographically
dispersed assets; and
Enable any group or organization to easily connect their
assets into the enterprise in an interoperable fashion without
significant investment in information systems.
IEOS would also advance the Global Earth Observation System of
Systems (GEOSS), which is now supported by more than 66 countries and
46 international organizations. This U.S.-initiated effort is intended
to allow Federal interagency and multi-national coordination to assure
that disparate environmental-related data systems here at home and
abroad are interoperable and compatible. An effective IEOS effort
should have clear designation of responsibilities, be enabled by a web-
based system that allows rapid communication, funded across agency
boundaries with a clear purpose. IEOS/GEOSS would improve the
capabilities for today's decisionmakers by providing new information
products. That is not the case today. IEOS has neither been funded nor
has program leadership been designated.
Clear Leadership Is Essential
Clear leadership is essential to resolve the issues and attain the
goals identified in the Decadal Study. The report before you calls for
increased funding to improve our current national Earth monitoring
capability. Yes, funding is important but the essential missing element
is leadership. Scientific assessment, increased budgets, improved
technical capabilities, and coordinated public-private engagement need
designated, consolidated leadership. Critical elements including
satellite and aircraft sensors, in situ instruments such as stream
gauges, and geospatial information systems, have been fragmented among
our Federal agencies, always a secondary mission, never the priority
responsibility.
Earth observation is not a priority mission for any designated
agency at the cabinet level. Not within NASA, the Department of
Commerce, the Department of the Interior nor any other Federal agency.
The important technologies that enable us to measure climate change and
identify and monitor the impacts to our environment, our lives and our
livelihood are the sole responsibility of no one agency or person.
Who should be the lead agency or position for U.S. Earth
observation capabilities? What is our national vision for Earth
observations? How are requirements from the Federal operational sector
such as NOAA, USGS, USDA and EPA reflected in our research and
development programs within NASA and NSF? Are requirements from the
private sector being addressed?
Without a designated lead, we will not see:
These critical assets protected;
A national Earth observations strategy that appropriately
addresses climate change;
The required investment for these programs appropriately
reflected in agency plans and budgets;
Our national investment fully leveraged for societal and
economic benefit;
The smooth transition from research to operations;
Our land-observing capabilities elevated to the level of
atmospheric and ocean observations;
An improved engagement between government and the private
sector (industry, Academia, and non-governmental
organizations);
The much-called-for integration of our national Earth
observation systems; and
The products needed to make the best decisions for our
country and future generations.
As a first step, I support the report's recommendation that:
The Office of Science and Technology Policy, in collaboration
with the relevant agencies, and in consultation with the
scientific community, should develop and implement a plan for
achieving and sustaining global Earth observations. Then a
single point of contact or program office at the Cabinet level
should be established to assure complementary rather than
duplicative or fragmented effort for all operational aspects of
Earth observation and analysis.
I urge that the private sector--industry, academia, and non-
governmental organizations--be consulted regarding an integrated plan
for Earth observations.
Time To Act
As we are often reminded, time passes quickly.
In preparation for this hearing, I reviewed numerous reports, one
of which is noted earlier in this testimony and is entitled, Linking
Remote Sensing Technology and Global Needs: A Strategic Vision. It was
a report to NASA on applications. Ironically, the vision outlined in
this 1987 report was as follows:
The vision for the future is an Applications Information System
available to all users--whether a large government agency or
small local firm--that will provide overall benefits for the
public good and further economic interests of the United
States.
What we knew 20 years ago, what the Brundtland Commission
acknowledged in their groundbreaking report, and what we are reminded
of today is that our nationally-funded Earth Science and operational
technology programs are vital to our society and economy. If nothing
else, I hope that the Decadal Survey will motivate you as policymakers
and leaders to take action now--action to protect, leverage, and
advance these assets so critical to protecting our nation, the world,
and our future. Let us not 20 years from now simply acknowledge the
words written by the Decadal Survey Committee, but rather be able to
point to the Decadal Survey as a turning point for action and
commitment to protect, further develop, and exploit these assets for
benefit of the Nation and the world.
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
The Alliance was formed in 2004 to facilitate participation by the
private sector--industry, Academia, and nongovernmental organizations--
in U.S. and international planning for Earth observations, especially
as it relates to GEOSS. The Alliance for Earth Observations is an
initiative of the nonprofit Institute for Global Environmental
Strategies, a 501(c)3 nonprofit organization.
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
The Alliance for Earth Observations commends the work started by
the National Research Council Space Studies Board Committee on Earth
Science and Applications from Space in its recently released report:
Earth Science and Applications from Space: National Imperatives for the
Next Decade and Beyond. This important report sheds light on the
declining Earth observation capabilities of the United States and lays
out priorities for the next decade for Earth observations from space.
This report offers the foundation of a roadmap to bring the U.S. Earth
Observation capability in line with expectations for meeting the global
change and climate policy challenges we see so frequently in the
headlines. Science information is needed to inform policy, and the
``Earth Science Decadal Survey'' as this report is called, points us in
the direction we need to advance our national capability into the 21st
Century.
The members of the Alliance recognize the immense value to
society--both in terms of economic benefits to our citizens and in
meeting our responsibilities as stewards of our environment--of U.S.
programs in space-based Earth observations. The Committee, capably led
by Dr. Richard A. Anthes, President of the University Corporation for
Atmospheric Research and Dr. Berrien Moore III, Professor and Director
of the Institute for the Study of Earth, Oceans, and Space, University
of New Hampshire, was comprised of an outstanding team of subject
matter experts. In their report, they have provided a very valuable
prioritization of scientific questions that need to be addressed along
with recommendations for the space-based missions that should be
developed and launched to provide the data needed to address important
societal issues--in the near, mid, and far term.
The Alliance recognizes the challenge in the current budget climate
of augmenting funding for multiple agencies charged with executing the
Nation's operational and research Earth observations programs. In the
recently released President's Budget Request for Fiscal Year (FY) 2008,
funding for satellite programs at the National Aeronautics & Space
Administration (NASA), National Oceanographic & Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA), and U.S. Geological Survey would not accommodate
the recommendations of the report. The President's Budget, if enacted
in FY-08, would enable NOAA to proceed with current acquisition plans
for both the polar-orbiting and geostationary satellite programs, with
their now-reduced instrument suites, and NASA to maintain momentum only
on their current set of missions. The Alliance recognizes the
importance of increasing U.S. Government funding to accomplish the
recommendations in the report to advance our national Earth satellite
programs. Funding would need to be implemented as top line budget
increases, in order to not affect other important agency priorities.
The Alliance agrees with the Decadal Survey and its predecessor
reports from the National Academy of Sciences that current NOAA, NASA,
and USGS budgets and programs do not include the programmatic structure
needed to manage the research, development, and flight testing of new
instrument technologies, and subsequent transition to operational
missions, necessary to continue to evolve U.S. operational Earth
observation capacity. Thorough technology demonstrations could have
provided the risk mitigation needed to curtail decisions to cancel
critically needed climate monitoring, ocean imaging, and advanced
atmospheric sounding instruments from the NPOESS and GOES-R programs.
Future plans and decisions can benefit from the report's
recommendations to invest in developing next generation technologies
and systems to reduce cost and schedule risks to operational programs.
Implementation of the report's recommendation would be timely in
addressing this longstanding problem.
The Alliance for Earth Observations is a publicly and privately
funded initiative of the Institute for Global Environmental Strategies
to promote the understanding and use of land, air and sea observations
for societal and economic benefit.
______
Senator Nelson. So, Dr. Moore, do you consider the 17
missions recommended in the survey an all-inclusive wish-list?
Or do you consider it the minimum responsible complement of the
measurement tools?
STATEMENT OF BERRIEN MOORE III, Ph.D., DISTINGUISHED PROFESSOR
AND DIRECTOR, INSTITUTE FOR THE STUDY OF EARTH, OCEANS, AND
SPACE, UNIVERSITY OF NEW
HAMPSHIRE; CO-CHAIR, COMMITTEE ON EARTH SCIENCE AND
APPLICATIONS FROM SPACE, NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL, THE
NATIONAL ACADEMIES
Dr. Moore. First of all, Senator thank you for inviting
myself and my colleagues.
I think, given what this planet is faced with--and you have
articulated that well this afternoon--I believe it is the
minimal responsible recommendation that looks at the challenges
facing the planet.
And it is not a wish list. We had a wish list--there were
110 wishes put forth, with a lot of enthusiasm. And we cut that
with NASA receiving 15, NOAA receiving 3, and one shared
jointly, making a total of 17.
I know it's expensive, but I believe there are ways that
one can reach back to that restoration of $2 billion. It's
certainly not going to be done in 1 year or 5 years, but
there's a process that would be beneficial. I think it's a
reasoned response to the challenges.
Senator Nelson. What would be the impact if only a fraction
of those 17 were implemented?
Dr. Moore. Well, that would depend upon which fraction.
For instance, let's suppose that we don't go ahead with
Synthetic Aperture Radar that would give us the NSAR, the
inframetric radar that gives us a much better understanding of
earthquake potential. That's very valuable to this country, and
very valuable to the planet.
If we don't move forward with the recommended Aerosol
Mission--we won't be capable of making aerosol observations
when forests are burned, releasing tremendous pollutant loads
of aerosols. Some of those aerosols actually lead to global
cooling, many lead to global warming. So the only way to arrive
at a balance is through observations of the aerosols.
We recommended a CO2 mission that would be
active, that is, by using a laser that could determine the
sources and sinks of carbon dioxide, all around the planet; all
seasons, all latitudes. If we're going to manage the carbon
cycle, we've got to have that information. If you give that up,
then that's not there.
So, that's why we looked across what we thought was the
appropriate suite--we know it's a challenge. We know it's a
challenge. And in this budgetary climate, it's a very great
challenge. But, the planet is facing very serious issues that
are not going to go away. Earthquakes are not going to stop,
hurricanes are not going to stop, global warming is not going
to stop.
Senator Nelson. What specific actions do you think should
be taken to improve the interagency collaboration on Earth
Science missions that we seem to have had such difficultly
with?
Dr. Moore. Let me just go back to that from the point that
you raised, that we have seen this decline in the NASA budget.
And then we had a corresponding increase in the NOAA budget to
accomplish the NPOESS and the new GOESS. Now, we have a perfect
storm. We lost the money in the NASA budget, and the increase
in the NOAA budget did not turn out to give us what we thought
we were going to get, so it's kind of a lose-lose situation.
I think that there was a history of NASA essentially doing
the R&D side, including the oversight, as we went into an
operational sensor. It cost money, but NASA has the talent--the
Goddard Space Flight Center, for instance, has the talent to
give that kind of independent, tough oversight. I'd like to see
us move back to the system that we had in place that brought
about the NPOESS program, and the earlier GOESS program. We had
trouble back then, but not like today.
Senator Nelson. Anybody else want to jump in on that set of
questions? Agency cooperation, collaboration? Dr. Freilich?
STATEMENT OF DR. MICHAEL H. FREILICH, DIRECTOR,
EARTH SCIENCE DIVISION, SCIENCE MISSION DIRECTORATE,
NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION
Dr. Freilich. Sure.
First, let me say thanks to Dr. Moore, and all of the rest
of the people on the Decadal Survey for the thoughtful
identification of the science problems, and the guidance that
it provides. We welcome the survey, in fact, we asked for it in
2003.
We take the survey's recommendations very, very seriously.
In fact, in the Fiscal Year 2008 budget request--that's before
you--we are taking care in NASA of all of the precursor
missions that were identified in the interim report, as well as
the Decadal Survey.
In the next 2 years, we'll be launching five key climate
spacecraft, and two more after that, up through 2013. The two
later ones are the Landsat Data Continuity Mission (LDCM), and
the Global Precipitation Measurement Mission--all of those were
highly rated in the Decadal Survey.
So, we take that guidance extremely seriously, and we will
be taking the guidance from the Decadal Survey, as the
Administration puts together its Fiscal Year 2009 budget, and
beyond.
Relative to your question of interagency cooperation--it is
a real challenge for this country, and it has been the
challenge for some time. It's hard enough to design and
implement and fly and validate and exploit the data from first
copies of instruments, to then be able to do an interagency
transfer, and have those measurements taken reliably on
operational spacecraft, so that we can get the 30-year climate
data records, which are essential--it's very, very difficult.
In response, I believe to Congressional language in the
2005 Authorization bill, NASA and NOAA are working quite hard
together--we have a joint working group specifically focused on
research to operations transition. While it is a challenge, and
we haven't solved, certainly, all of those problems, or even
many of those problems, I think we are strengthening the
relationship between those two agencies. I'm new in this job at
NASA, but it is certainly one of my very strong objectives, and
a high-priority objective, for us to work much more
efficiently, much more substantively together.
Senator Nelson. Well, since you are relatively new to this
position, I welcome you to get in and try to straighten out
some of the problems between NASA and NOAA, and NPOESS includes
the Air Force, as well, doesn't it?
When Dr. Griffin was here last week, he questioned whether
the Decadal Survey's cost estimates are too optimistic. Is
NASA, Dr. Freilich, going to do its own estimates of the
recommended missions, and share the results with everybody
else?
Dr. Freilich. Yes. We are embarking on an aggressive series
of what we call concept studies, to look very, very carefully
at the notional missions that were endorsed, especially the
early ones, the highest-priority ones, from the Decadal Survey.
The objective of these studies is to use the full costing and
engineering analyses machinery of the NASA centers--JPL and
Goddard, in particular--to address and understand the
technological challenges inherent in getting the measurements
that were identified by the Decadal Survey, and the full costs
of these missions, including the launch vehicle, and
especially, also, the science and the validation.
We're moving aggressively forward on that now, now that we
have the Decadal Survey's exact recommendations in terms of the
measurements to be taken. When we have those engineering and
cost analyses, we will much better be able to generate an
integrated road map forward, taking into account the high-
priority science that was identified by the Decadal Survey, the
issues of NPOESS, and the removal of the climate instruments
pursuant to Nunn-McCurdy, that you so eloquently discussed. And
the contributions, interest and expertise of our international
partners. So, we intend, within the next 12 to 15 months or so,
to have an integrated, well-understood, road map forward to
make progress. We've done the precursor missions--or I should
say, we are finishing the precursor missions, and then we'll be
in a position to move forward on the high-priority science that
the Decadal Survey guides us toward.
Senator Nelson. And when do you think those cost estimates
would be available to the Committee?
Dr. Freilich. We are working on them now, and we are--as I
said, looking carefully at each one of those notional missions,
also understanding what we need to do, and can do, to mitigate
the NPOESS climate problem. And I think in some months--
probably less than 6 months, we will have a fairly clear idea
of the true full costs of those notional missions.
Senator Nelson. Dr. Brown, you--OK, I'll get to Ms.
Colleton in just a second--Dr. Brown, you've had some excellent
testimony about Earth Science satellites, and Ms. Colleton. I
want to ask you all about the impact of this research.
STATEMENT OF OTIS D. BROWN, Ph.D., DEAN, ROSENSTIEL
SCHOOL OF MARINE AND ATMOSPHERIC SCIENCE,
UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI; MEMBER, COMMITTEE ON EARTH
SCIENCE AND APPLICATIONS FROM SPACE,
NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL, THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES
Dr. Brown. Thank you, Senator.
Let me step back for a minute, and talk about a bit of
history here, and it will frame my answer a little better, I
think relative to impacts.
The history from the seventies, eighties and nineties, is
that each Earth Science community approached NASA individually,
and said, ``OK, as oceanographers, we need this,'' ``As
meteorologists or atmospheric scientists, we need this,'' ``As
land-cover, land-use people, we need this,'' ``As climate
scientists, we need this.'' And NASA tried its best in the
Earth Observing System to respond in an integrated way to all
of these different ideas, requests and needs.
The Decadal Survey was very different, in the sense that,
as has happened in astronomy and other disciplines with NASA,
NASA asked the community, ``You know, you guys are all Earth
Scientists, why don't you get together and give us your best
set of integrated priorities, rather than us having to decide
what the priorities should be of everything you've asked?''
That's a fundamental difference, and this downsizing of more
than 100 different possibilities to the order of less than 20,
is a result of--I wouldn't say smoke-filled rooms, not these
days--but, you know, a lot of hard negotiation about saying,
``How is it that we can really get the highest priority needs
of the broad community on the limited set of missions?''
So, this is a different set of mission requests than
anything NASA has ever seen before. But, it had to be built on
a base, and this gets into the impacts. The base is what's in
space now, the Earth Observing System and a number of other
prototype research missions that are flying, things that have
to do everything from trying to measure tropical rain rates, to
surface vector winds--many different, very unique sorts of
missions.
But all of these missions are neither research or
operational really. In most cases, they were launched as
research missions, but they found operational niches within the
government and private industry, not only in this country, but
globally.
And so, we're in an interesting situation. How do we
sustain these research missions that now have operational
needs? Whether it's for trying to better locate a hurricane, or
it's trying to better understand issues of drought or rain run-
off and floods in tropical regions. All of these results are
coming out of, what you would think, looking at the title of
the mission, was a research mission, not an operational one.
So, that's a problem. There hasn't been a real functional
mechanism to say, ``OK, we know it works, now how do we put it
into a broader operational context?''
So, one of the zero-order challenges for the Decadal Survey
was, what's the foundation you build the future on? That's
why--as you look at the high-priority missions, you might get
what you think is a bit of a mixed message, because you hear
people talking about NPOESS and climate sensors coming off of
NPOESS and so on, and in fact, as you look at the projected set
of missions from the Decadal Survey, it doesn't really give you
a simple answer to that question.
So, let me address the impacts. Impacts, I think, can be
direct--operationally now, we're using surface vector winds
from various different missions, actually, most all of them
research, and in the hurricane community they've been shown to
improve forecasts. Case in point--tropical rainfall measuring
from space. Again, this is a capability that has had a strong
impact.
I think you could say that as you look at the breadth of
this whole suite of missions from the mid-nineties to the early
part of this millennium, that many of them have been moved into
this quasi-operational context. But that context sits between
what NASA has traditionally done, and what NOAA does, as its
charter.
So that's, why you won't get a totally straightforward
answer to your question. I think it's demonstrable what can be
done from space, it's demonstrable how long, I think, it'll
last, but it's the ``Then what?'' question. And quite directly,
in the Decadal Survey, we had to assume at the outset that
NPOESS was going to happen on a certain timescale, with a
certain implementation suite, and then go from there.
And, I'd invite the co-chair, if he'd like to comment on
this it was a very interesting and detailed, long-term debate
within the survey, actually, about how to deal with a moving
NPOESS suite of capabilities.
Senator Nelson. Let me ask Ms. Colleton, what do you think?
STATEMENT OF NANCY COLLETON, PRESIDENT, INSTITUTE FOR GLOBAL
ENVIRONMENT STRATEGIES; EXECUTIVE
DIRECTOR, ALLIANCE FOR EARTH OBSERVATIONS
Ms. Colleton. I just wanted to make two points, my
apologies, thank you.
I just wanted to make two points in reference to the
Decadal Survey. The first is that, I think what is most
significant about the vision of the Decadal Program that was
adopted by this committee that is primarily scientists, is that
it went beyond looking just at fundamental science, and it
looked at applications for the good of the Nation, and the
world. And, I think this is a real much-needed shift as we see
more and more private sector entities using this information.
We're seeing new developments in our information technologies,
that are making this information available to more people than
ever before. Think of Google Earth, think of Microsoft Virtual
Earth--and those are just the beginning. We will be able to
access, and manipulate, and have decision-support tools like
never before, in the future certainly.
So, I think it's very important to recognize the essential
part of applications. And, I agree with Dr. Brown, totally.
When you look at, just for example, the TRIMM mission, the
Tropical Rain Measurement mission--that mission is going on its
10th year, I believe. It started out as a research mission, it
was--its success criteria was 3 years, it's now in its 10th
year. And it's very, very important to our hurricane
forecasting. And it was some time ago--I think it was 2 years
ago--that there was question as to whether NASA would continue
to fund the operation of TRIMM, and NOAA was saying, ``But, we
need those measurements for the upcoming hurricane season.''
And so, there are going to continue to be those kinds of
issues, until we have a clear research-to-operations transition
plan for the Nation, which brings me to my second point.
I think one of the things that has not been addressed by
the Decadal Study that I really believe, as a country, we need
to look at--and that's leadership. We recognize more and more
how vital these systems are to our livelihood, our property,
saving lives, I mean--being from Florida, you know well the
importance of hurricane forecasting, and we still, you know, we
see the kind of--the fact that we were able to evacuate 90
percent of Southeast Louisiana with 40 hours advance notice
with Katrina. That's better than we have ever been able to do.
But, I believe that that transition where this information
is no longer just available to the science community, but it's
becoming more operational all the time, and we have our
economy, is using this information and relying on this
information more and more. I think it calls for a new look at
how we're doing these programs, and leadership. Without
leadership, these programs--the budgets for them--will never be
protected. And, there will never be a long-term vision for, as
a Nation, for what we should be doing in this area.
Senator Nelson. Dr. Moore?
Dr. Moore. Yes, let me pick up on that point. And, we had a
specific recommendation--I should mention that the
recommendation that we initially debated was how to reorganize
the Federal Government, and we recognized we must be late in
the days of the Committee to be reorganizing the Federal
Government.
And so we stepped back from that. And, and yet the
motivation was precisely what's being stated--if you look at
the way we've, if you will, managed the Earth-observing
business in the United States, it has a checkered history.
Now, take Landsat--it's been all over the place--the only
place it's not been is the Senate of the United States--it's
been in the Air Force, it's been in the U.S. Geological Survey,
it went over to NOAA, back to NASA, back over to NOAA, back to
NASA--this is observing land surface where people live. This
should not be tossed around the Federal Government.
The situation with NPOESS, clearly the lessons will be
learned for many painful years. So, what we set forth was the
fact that we felt that the Office of Science and Technology
Policy has a unique opportunity in the next 2 years, in an
Administration which, by definition, will not succeed itself.
As far as I know, the Vice President is not running for
President. So, you are almost in an apolitical time for OSTP.
I'm from New Hampshire, we're not in an apolitical time in New
Hampshire--but it is a different scenorio for OSTP to sit down
with NASA and NOAA and the U.S. Geological Survey, with the
Congress, and with the community and with the private sector,
and say, ``What could we advise the incoming government in
2008, to do about this Earth observing? Let's see if we can't
get this thing on a more rational footing.'' It is not easy.
I think the primary problem is that the capabilities of
agencies do not necessarily line up with their
responsibilities. I think that is exactly where we have this
problem with NOAA. Their responsibility was for this next-
generation weather satellite. But they did not, necessarily
have internal capabilities to manage something of that
complexity.
So, I believe we're going to have to really rethink the way
in which we do business. It's just not working.
Senator Nelson. Dr. Freilich, what about the expected gap
between Landsat 7 and the Landsat Data Continuity Mission? What
is going to be the scientific impact of that gap?
Dr. Freilich. I'm not a land scientist myself, in fact, I'm
an oceanographer, like Otis Brown here.
However, we have looked, and are continuing to look quite
carefully at that. Climate time series are things to be
cherished, it takes 30 years to get a 30-year continuous data
set. We are investigating with our international partners, what
other data sources might be available for the relatively short
amount of time between the potential demise of Landsat 7, and
the plan for launch and operation of Landsat Data Continuity
Mission, which will be in 2011.
There are many, many other countries which are flying, or
plan to fly, land-observing missions. Not all of them at the
same level of radiometric accuracy, many of them at the same
level of spatial resolution, and coverage, as we have. So, we
are actively dealing in NASA with our international partners,
to try and assemble, as best as possible, a data set of land
observations to enable the climate science to continue, and to
enable this time series, which we've invested so much in as a
Nation, to continue to be able to serve the climate science, as
well as other communities.
Senator Nelson. By the way, if we didn't have enough to
worry about, the Chinese now have the capability to knock down
satellites.
Let me ask Dr. Moore, are the new missions that are
currently in NASA's pipeline, such as the Landsat Data
Continuity Mission, Glory, and NPP, are they consistent with
the Decadal Survey recommendations?
Dr. Moore. Yes, they are completely consistent.
And, I think that NASA had the interim report, which was
released in April of 2005, as a basis to build the 2008 report.
The interim budget dealt with the existing programs--Landsat
Data Continuity, Glory, so forth, the ones that you've
mentioned. And we said, ``We really need to get these on
track,'' and the 2008 and 2009 budgets do that.
NASA did not have, in preparation of the 2008 budget, the
final report of the Decadal Survey, which looked at the out-
years, beyond the existing programs, which the 2008-2009 really
address. And as a consequence, if we look at the run-out that,
after 2009, things go negative again.
I'm hopeful that Dr. Freilich leadership and with Alan
Stern coming in, that in the 2009 budget, we will see that run-
out turn around, because the real recommendations of the
Decadal Survey deal with these new missions that are the
absolute--they are the ones that are dead critical, in terms of
the problems that the Decadal Survey was looking at, whether it
was earthquakes or climate or severe weather or droughts or
greenhouse gases. They're the ones that address those issues.
Senator Nelson. Dr. Brown?
Dr. Brown. Two answers. One, as Dr. Moore said, the interim
report jumpstarted the internal processes within NASA, so that
they can address that particular suite of issues, including
GPM.
The outstanding problem, though, that is unaddressed--at
least from my perspective right now--is the loss of climate
sensor capability on NPOESS. We don't have an answer to that
problem, in either agency right now.
Senator Nelson. Are any of those projects what you would
consider a lower priority?
Dr. Brown. No. Actually, in terms of the Decadal Survey,
no. And as you might imagine, there were a lot of hard
negotiations that occurred to come up with that list. And there
was a consensus across the panels on the final list, that these
really were the -priority missions that needed to be looked at
in the next decade. So, I'm on board with those, sir.
Senator Nelson. Well, let me ask to any of you, if the
Earth Science Program were to proceed along the current path,
which is the bare-bones NPOESS and only the new missions in the
NASA pipeline, what are the risks, explain to our Committee, to
our Nation's coastal areas?
Dr. Brown. The risks are multi-fold, some would happen
sooner rather than later, Senator. The longer-term risks are,
you'll have interruptions of climate quality data records in a
number of areas, so you're going to lose continuity and have to
restart climate records that you really don't want to lose,
which are fundamental to look at long-term changes. For
example, there are input solar irradiance versus earth
radiation coming out, and understanding aerosol impacts. Those
would be areas that could be at risk.
Similarly you could--as you look at some of the other
climate-quality instruments on the NPOESS suite, see
interruptions in the climate part of the record.
The other part, which is the direct impacts has to do with
the slips in NPOESS, what is that going to mean to polar
orbiter, visible and infrared mapping coverage of the globe. We
don't know that yet, because we don't know what that interval
might be. But, if there is some interval, with much-reduced
coverage, that's going to undoubtedly have societal impacts,
because that's a primary sensor for many different sorts of
warnings that might be put out.
An area that I would specifically focus on has to do with,
as we look at sea level rise globally, and all of the aspects
that go into observing and forecasting it. It includes such
esoteric things as trying to map out polar ice extents--and
thickness, and so on. Which parts of those capabilities that
will be diminished is going to have an impact, as we try to
look at sea level rise? It's going to mean errors, the error-
bounds or our confidence in estimating these will change, for
example. Thank you.
Senator Nelson. Ms. Colleton, what do you think? How's this
going to affect ordinary Americans? Not necessarily on the
Coast, but if you want to talk about the Coast feel free.
Ms. Colleton. Well, I think one of the important things
that we have to consider is if, if there is a question about
our space capability in the future, we have to look at other
options. And, we've yet to talk about aircraft and in situ
measurements, and how important those are. And one of the
things that, clearly we're beginning to start is the
implementation of the Integrated Ocean Observing System, and
all of the regional associations across the country that do
coastal monitoring, et cetera. There was money in the
President's Fiscal Year 2008 budget to begin that process, I
don't think it's enough money, but programs like that will grow
in importance, if those space capabilities are not available.
And I think they--and the fact that we need to look at more of
the integrated information between space, aircraft, and in situ
information, and develop an integrated Earth Observing System
that would have all of those capabilities, is very, very
important.
Senator Nelson. Just as an aside, one of the aircraft
capabilities of NOAA is the G-4 that flies at 40,000 feet plus,
and tracks hurricanes. It's given them a 15 percent greater
accuracy in prediction of hurricane paths, with the resulting
additional early warning. That's a single-point failure, we
don't have a backup aircraft. And I've been trying to beat the
door down for the last several years about, ``Well, you only
need it for 6 months of the year, try to figure out when and
where another agency could use it for the other 6 months. You
can share it.'' But, I just spoke to the number two guy at
NOAA, and they're not going to. They don't have any plans to
come forward and request this. It's just another indication of
what you said, Ms. Colleton.
Ms. Colleton. And, again, I think it elevates the
importance of taking a comprehensive look--not just at our
space programs, but our U.S. common information infrastructure
that we're using, the in situ measurements we have, and
aircraft. And looking to have someone responsible within our
government to look at the whole picture, and determine if it's
appropriate or accurate for the challenges that we face.
Dr. Moore. Senator, could I just elaborate?
Senator Nelson. Please, please.
Dr. Moore. The question that you asked--if we didn't go
ahead with the recommendations of the Decadal Survey, and we
are living with the highly reduced NPOESS program, what would
be some of the things that you wouldn't have? Well, we wouldn't
have good measurements of ice sheets. We know that ice sheets
are changing. We know the changes in ice sheets lead to changes
in sea level. So, we would not have that.
Second, we wouldn't have good measurements of sea level.
One of the missions that we recommend deals with instruments
that not only will measure sea level, but will also measure
lake levels, as well as major rivers. We wouldn't have that
information.
In the GOESS program, they have eliminated the Coastal
Waters Imagery. In the Decadal Survey, we recommended a mission
that would not only handle coastal waters, but also air
pollution, the measurement of air pollution.
So, when you start down the list, I think the coastal
communities are living right at the tipping point. And the
recommendations that we've made were looking very much at the
issue of, what are the applications? Who are the people at
risk?
Soil moisture--this is a major issue for coastal areas.
There will be far less capability on the NPOESS mission than
was planned. One of the missions that we recommended was to
directly measure soil moistures.
So, I think that we've tried to identify priorities by
looking at these critical populations, and certainly the
coastal community is amongst the most critical population,
particularly viewed worldwide.
Dr. Freilich. I would just like to point out that we
presently are flying 14 Earth-observing satellites. We've
talked a bit about sea level, and that is certainly one of the
triumphs--we have accurate measurements of global sea level
that started with the TOPEX-Poseidon joint NASA-French Space
Agency Program. Presently, the Jason-1 altimetry mission is
flying, and the very first of the new missions that are in the
budget to launch--and it will launch in 2008--is a yet another
follow-on--the Ocean Surface Topography Mission. So, we have
focused on very, very high priorities, and ocean surface
topography, at least, is one global time series which is going
to continue at extremely high accuracy, with good overlap
between sensors.
Senator Nelson. Ms. Colleton, how do state and local
government use the data from these satellites?
Ms. Colleton. They use it in a variety of ways. I think
probably the best example is in looking at drought, the drought
monitor that's available, you know we're experiencing a
terrible drought right now in Texas, and last week alone there
were terrible dust storms, 35,000 homes and businesses without
power, as a result.
But, the satellite data is put into systems, information
systems, that allow anyone, anywhere to access it. They can do
this through the University of Nebraska at Lincoln, go to the
drought monitor and determine what the outlook is, what's
currently happening, what the outlook might be for a few weeks
ahead.
So it's not only with drought. One of the most exciting
things that we're beginning to see in the area of applications
is the relationship between environmental information, and
public health. And again, it's just an emerging thing. But we
can look, for example, at malaria, and look at parts of the
world, for example, that may have characteristics that might
promote the next malaria outbreak. How is that helpful? Because
it helps NGOs get medicine to certain parts of the world,
producers to distribute it, et cetera.
One other area that I think will be very, very important
with emerging applications of remote sensing, or satellite
Earth observations is that we--again, we're just beginning to
look at--is the application of this information to the carbon
finance market, and how this technology becomes an innovation
for climate change. We're looking at renewable fuels, we're
looking at emission reductions, but are we looking at Earth
observations and how it can be used?
I mean, for one, for example, just in monitoring, it will
show us whether or not our policies are working. So, I think
for state and local government leaders, this information has a
lot of applications.
Senator Nelson. Dr. Freilich, why don't you give us some
commentary on why you think NPOESS has had so many problems?
What has NASA learned about the structure, so we can apply it
to future collaborations?
Dr. Freilich. An excellent question, Senator.
NPOESS is a step forward from the Earth Observing System
that NASA was flying and from the operational weather
satellites that NOAA and the Department of Defense separately
had been flying, and are flying right now.
In some instances, the instruments that were anticipated to
fly, or that were chosen to fly on NPOESS were quite mature,
and we had built them, NASA had often demonstrated their
capabilities, and their utility, and they transitioned well.
For instance, on the NPOESS Preparatory Project, one of the
instruments, the so-called ATMS, Advanced Technology Microwave
Sounder instrument, is in good shape. The technology is moving
along, it was mature, it is, in fact, already integrated onto
the spacecraft.
In some other areas, I think that corporately, we were
reaching rather far. We were attempting to get to the next
generation of instruments to fly on an operational spacecraft,
when perhaps we had not fully examined the technology, and the
implementation issues associated with them in the context of
research missions. Historically, NASA did the research
missions, as you heard previously from my colleagues. Many of
our research satellites, virtually all of them, provide data in
near-real-time. And, those measurements originally flown for
research purposes, when they demonstrate their utility, are
then used routinely in operational numerical weather
forecasting, marine hazard warning, et cetera.
So, that was the process that we had, and I think that we
jumped a little bit, perhaps, in our eagerness to get a truly
outstanding operational constellation of instruments. And in my
personal opinion, that is not quite the way we had shown it in
the past, and the way in which we had experience.
Senator Nelson. Do you think it can meet its revised cost
schedule and technical goals?
Dr. Freilich. NASA is a partner in the NPOESS program as a
technology provider. In the short time I've been here, I've not
had the time to study the details of where we are in NPOESS as
a whole. I think that the Nunn-McCurdy recertification focuses
NPOESS on its weather forecasting capabilities, and based on
the analyses that went into that, we will be able to achieve
those capabilities, that performance.
As far as climate goes, I think that the Nunn-McCurdy re-
certification is fairly honest, and it says that, given the
resources that are available, we should not be focusing on
climate measurements, and therefore, we as a country have to
look at how to mitigate the removal of those measurements. It's
not that we shouldn't focus on climate, but this program can't
afford to focus on climate. We should look to see how to
mitigate the impact of removing those sensors, but get the
measurements flown in different ways. And, we're actively
working with NOAA and other portions of the government through
OSTP, in particular to try to come up with mitigation
strategies. That will feed into our integrated road map that I
talked about previously.
Because, the science and the societal impact that were
identified in the Decadal Survey really requires a background
context, if you will, of measurements that we had thought were
going to be obtained from NPOESS, and if they're not obtained
from NPOESS, we still have to make those measurements in order
to advance our Earth-system science.
Senator Nelson. Are there particular problems that you
think we ought to be on the lookout for?
Dr. Freilich. Sorry, I don't quite understand the question,
whether it's----
Senator Nelson. In the revised cost schedule and technical
goals? Do you think we can meet them all, or are there going to
be some problems that we ought to be looking for?
Dr. Freilich. Every space mission that I've been associated
with and that I've known about, has had challenges associated
with it. There are clearly two instruments on the NPOESS
preparatory project--the VIIRS instrument and the CRIS
instrument, which at the moment, represent, quite significant
technological challenges. They are not NASA-provided
instruments, I might point out, but they're critical
instruments for the science that has been identified, and for
the societal impact that we would like to extract from this
national investment.
Senator Nelson. Do you think the NPP will fill the gap
between EOS and NPOESS?
Dr. Freilich. NPP, as well as international partner
contributions, in particular, EUMETSAT and the MetOp series of
spacecraft, and the instruments and spacecraft that we have in
the Fiscal Year 2008 budget will bridge the gap. Those seven
missions that I talked about that will launch out between 2008
and 2013 which, by the way, not only includes the Ocean Surface
Topography Mission, but also the orbiting carbon observatory
that Ms. Colleton talked about, which is also going to launch
in 2008. Those missions--and the ones that we're flying now--
will certainly not only continue, but expand the range of
variables that we're presently measuring, and then the question
just becomes a programmatic one, of when the follow-ons take
place. Now that we have the clear guidance from the Decadal
Survey, we can begin to build those integrated programs.
Senator Nelson. Dr. Moore, you want to talk to us about
projects that were dropped from NPOESS, and tell us what you
think about the status of them, then Dr. Freilich, why don't
you comment on that and to what degree you think you're going
to be able to get them in the budget?
Dr. Moore. Well, there are several. I'll begin with the
less expensive ones. Perhaps they could come back into the
budget via NOAA. And these are very important for climate.
The total solar irradiance monitor--this monitors the solar
output--was dropped. And, the instrument to measure the energy
coming off of the planet was dropped. Now, if you're going to
do climate work, the concern about climate is the change in the
energy balance, because of the greenhouse gases. You've got to
have the total solar irradiance, and you've got to have the
energy coming off the planet--those are of the first order. The
Decadal Survey recommended those back to NOAA because we felt
that--not only were they important, but they were not budget
breakers. In fact, I think it would probably be in the noise of
the uncertainty about the NPOESS budget. So, that would be a
very clear recommendation.
The other was the altitude distribution of ozone in the
atmosphere. That was eliminated--they were going to continue to
measure the total amount of ozone in the column of air, but not
see in detail, the altitude. We really need to understand that.
So those are three things that we felt could be put back on the
NOAA side.
On the other aspects, it appears that there will probably
be far less capability of measuring soil moisture. And
therefore, one of the early recommendations to NASA was a soil
moisture mission. Now, this is a good example of where I think
a NASA mission does not fulfill the NOAA and Air Force
responsibility. This would be a scientific mission, but there
will have to be the capability of taking the data from this
scientific mission and incorporating that into the operational
side of NOAA and the Air Force.
What worries me, is that in the reduction of the budget for
NPOESS, there will be a loss of that capability to utilize that
data for operational purposes. So, we're recommending a wide
swath altimeter, to look at ocean altimetry, sea level height,
as well as rivers and lakes. The altimeter was lost from the
NPOESS mission. This is a recommendation to NASA, but once
again--will there be the capability of utilizing this data?
Finally, the NPOESS mission was advertised, and still is
advertised, as not only a weather mission, but a climate
mission--the instruments are said to have climate capability,
that means that they're very stable, they make a very precise
and accurate measurement.
Well, the NPOESS program has something they call ``weather
centrals.'' These are the places that the data is processed for
weather prediction purposes. Where's the climate central? In
order to produce climate data records, as Mike Freilich said
very well, to produce these long time series, they require data
that is often reprocessed three, four, five times. The reason
for that is, instruments age--(just as we age)--and performance
changes. So, as the instrument changes, the algorithms that
process the data need to be changed. The algorithms need, for
climate signals, to be the very best we can get--not the
fastest. For weather purposes, speed is everything. So, where's
the climate central? Despite our very clear recommendation in
the interim report, and again in the final report, we've never
had NOAA respond to that. Yet, if you're going to have a
climate mission, you need to produce climate data.
So, first of all, I think there are serious issues with
respect to the instruments. Second, we've tried to make a
recommendation to NOAA on these energy balance issues--some of
the measurements that we've recommended to NASA are high-
priority measurements, third, there will still be the cost of
ingesting this data, and finally there's the issue of the
climate central.
Senator Nelson. What do you think, Dr. Freilich?
Dr. Freilich. OK, let me go down the list that Dr. Moore
presented.
We've already talked about ocean surface topography and
altimetry, the OSTM mission will be launching in 2008. Dr.
Moore mentioned the radiation balance, and in particular, the
total solar irradiance. The Glory mission, which we'll launch
at the end of calendar year 2008, is in the final stages of
implementation now. It has two instruments on it. One of them
is an aerosol polarimetry sensor, but the other is a total
solar irradiance sensor. So, that mission is funded, will be
launching at the end of 2008, or the very beginning of 2009--
and that will continue that extremely important time series.
Which, by the way, requires absolute overlap of the
measurements. We, unfortunately are not in a position where we
can build total solar irradiance instruments which have
sufficiently good absolute accuracy to tolerate a gap. But, we
have a TSI, a Total Solar Irradiance instrument, which will
launch on the Glory mission, and that one is good.
As far as the Earth Radiation budget instrumentation, the
CLARREO mission, as Dr. Moore pointed out, is a joint set of
measurements between NASA and NOAA. It is one of the
potentially lower cost missions, we're looking at it carefully,
and certainly one of the high-priority science ones, and we'll
be looking very carefully--it's one of the four earliest
missions that the Decadal Survey recommended, and we'll be
looking very carefully and be guided by the Decadal Survey, as
I've said many times, in putting together our integrated plan.
So, it's going to be quite high up, in our focus early on.
Senator Nelson. And what year do you think that will come
in?
Dr. Freilich. I can't say right now, because we have to put
the plan together, and it has to account--as I said before--for
all of the measurements that are required to advance the
science. We need to be able to balance the resources that are
available with all of the measurements that we need, including
the new measurements for the Decadal Survey science, such as
soil moisture, and the context measurements that would have
been provided by NPOESS, had it gone as expected. So, as in so
many other things that we do--and as is emphasized so strongly
in the Decadal Survey, where they talk about balance between
disciplines, and balance between research and flight projects,
and balance between airborne and in situ measurements--we have
to deal with balance for the Nation, certainly, for NASA, and
inside the Earth Science Division. But that's the whole point
of our integrated roadmap, which we are embarked on right now,
given the clear objectives that have been set out by the
Decadal Survey.
I might also point out, sir, if I can, that the Fiscal Year
2008 President's budget requests funding for a mission--a
competitively selected, unspecified Earth Systems Science
Pathfinder mission--that is a medium-sized mission and will
launch in approximately 2014. As part of our integrated
roadmap, we are taking that line into account. So, I think
that, an answer to your question is that, when we put the
integrated roadmap together, there is money in the President's
budget for a medium-sized mission to launch in 2014, and the
question is, precisely what scientific focus should it have?
Senator Nelson. Would it consider the other two that were
left off, for the measurement of the soil moisture and for the
altitude distribution of ozone?
Dr. Freilich. Let me deal with them separately. The
altitude distribution of ozone is a relatively small and
relatively mature technology that we have. In fact, the total
ozone and the atmospheric profile were supposed to be two
instruments originally, but that were closely linked to each
other, and we will look very, very carefully at getting that
one flown rapidly.
That is not in the same class of investment technology, or
anything else that we're talking about for the other ones.
In terms of soil moisture, there are a number of
possibilities that were laid out in the Decadal Survey and they
dovetail, actually, fairly well in some cases with the Global
Precipitation Measurement Mission. And we're looking carefully,
as I keep saying, at an integrated approach to make the best
use of the resources that we have--so that if we can, in fact,
overlap some of these and kill multiple birds with fewer
stones, we're looking very, very, carefully at doing that.
NASA's contributions to the Global Precipitation Mission
has two parts to it. The first is a core spacecraft, joint with
our Japanese Space Agency partners, that will have a couple of
different instruments on it--an active precipitation radar, and
a passive radiometer. That will launch in 2013. In 2014,
however, this budget line includes the so-called GPM
Constellation spacecraft, which we need in order to get the
good, accurate global precipitation measurements, that GPM as a
unit, is intended to provide.
However, the radiometer that is on that spacecraft may,
perhaps, be able to be adapted, enhanced, whatever--I don't
want to do design in front of the Senate, in fact, I'm not even
capable of doing design in my office, being an oceanographer.
However, those are the sorts of questions that we're asking
ourselves, as we put together the integrated roadmap--how best
to get the measurements that we need that advance the science
with the resources that we have available.
Senator Nelson. And what about the idea of weather centrals
becoming climate centrals, as Ms. Colleton mentioned?
Dr. Freilich. I'm not sure that I heard that weather
centrals should become climate centrals, what I heard Ms.
Colleton and Dr. Moore say, was that capability, that function,
must be recognized as scientifically and societally very
important. NASA, in general, does not do that sort of work,
because that's an operational kind of capability. However, we
really, really need it in order to advance both the science and
the societal impact.
Senator Nelson. Ms. Colleton, do you want to expand on
that?
Ms. Colleton. I think that Dr. Moore said it appropriately.
Senator Nelson. Turn on your mike.
Ms. Colleton. Sorry--I'll learn by the time this hearing is
over, to turn on my microphone, I apologize.
But, I think Dr. Moore said it accurately--the way that the
NPOESS program is structured right now, there is this focus on
weather centrals, that rely and push for speed in delivery,
where the climate centrals aren't being considered at this
point, and those require more sensitive types of
instrumentation, and processing.
Is that correct, Dr. Moore?
Dr. Moore. I think that, the weather centrals have their
job, and it's best to let them focus on that job. A climate
central needs a different oversight, a different scientific
oversight, it requires advanced computing--as does the
weather--but perhaps it should be structured differently, and
separated from the task of the weather centrals.
Our concern is that, right now, it's not in the budget, it
doesn't appear to be in the planning, speaking to NOAA, and I
do not see any way to simply try to piggy-back it on something
else. I think it's a very serious enterprise, and it's not
being addressed.
The other comment I wanted to make was when I addressed the
issue on the solar monitoring and so forth--I was taking into
consideration that NASA on the Glory mission gets us to about
2013 with this solar monitoring. But then it stops, because
it's deleted from the NPOESS mission. So, our recommendation is
that, it's not expensive, it is highly important, as Mike said,
you've got to have it overlap with whatever is on-orbit at that
time, making that measurement, because you need to get a
consistent time series. And therefore, it was natural to put it
on, put it back on the first NPOESS spacecraft.
But, it requires resources. And what I'm afraid of is, the
NPOESS situation is not in closure yet, and we may see
additional pressure on the program, and therefore there will
not be the ability to respond to these very real needs that
we're going to have. And I just don't see how they're going to
be met, unless things change.
Dr. Brown. Senator, a final comment from me on that. Let's,
and, go back to the earlier discussion that we had on the
Decadal Survey committee. And that was that, you know, should
you restructure the Federal Government to deal with these
challenges of the NPOESS program?
What you see, though, is when restructuring had to happen
because of Nunn-McCurdy, there was no climate sponsor to step
up and say, ``That's my responsibility I want to preserve that.
Here's a budget to do that.'' That, I think, is a fundamental
issue as we move into this new suite of satellites. Who is
going to be the climate sponsor for Earth Observing Systems? I
don't know what the answer is. I'm not going to presume that,
but I do think that is the question.
Senator Nelson. Any further comments from any of you all?
Yes, ma'am?
Ms. Colleton. If I could, we've spent a lot of time talking
about NPOESS this afternoon. But I think, again, we have to
consider, NPOESS is supposed to go through 2024, and are we
considering what follows? Or, are some of these missions that
are getting set back longer and longer times. Again, I would
call--I would hope that you would call--for a long-term
strategy for Earth observations. We do not have one. We do not
have a national strategy, we need to address these climate
questions, it's imperative, and I would hope that you would
call for such an action.
Senator Nelson. Dr. Moore, you were about to say something?
Dr. Moore. Yes, one final comment--I recognize that when we
put forth 17 missions, and say we need to get back to the year
2000, that's a major step. We could have classed those
missions, grouped them into three large spacecraft, and said
we're only recommending three missions. We thought we were
recommending a more robust strategy by breaking it up.
So, let's think about how we might exploit that robust
strategy. Mike Freilich has spoken, I think, very positively,
we all appreciate it in the community--about the Decadal
Survey. Let's see if we can't find a way to actually embrace
it, beyond these road-mapping exercises. And so, what I would
like to suggest is, we've recommended 17 missions to NASA.
Let's look at the first six or seven of them. Let's start with
them. Say, $10 million a year for seven missions to do the kind
of detailed cost analysis, do the kind of detailed high
technological risk parts, the so-called ``tall poles''--let's
start working those right now.
So, $70 million to take on the first seven--what would
happen? Well, first of all, we would all join forces in the
community because we would see a positive response. The
country, I think, would begin to feel positively too, that
we've got this thing back on track. Industry would look at this
and say, ``Well, Earth Science is a place that we need to put
our industrial money.'' I know the industry, quite often will
say, ``Well, if NASA's going to invest ``X'' number of dollars,
we need to invest that, because we're competing against our
peers out here.'' So, when you're in a hole, the first thing
you do is stop digging. Instead we would start to dig steps out
of the hole. So, by making that kind of investment--$70 million
is a lot of money, but in other ways, it's not a lot of money.
Senator Nelson. Anything from you all for the record?
Dr. Freilich. Thank you very much.
Senator Nelson. Well, thank you for your time. I did not
introduce you all, we just started right in on our
conversation. Dr. Freilich is the Director of the Earth
Sciences Division of the Science Mission Directorate at NASA,
Dr. Moore is Director of the Institute for Study of Earth,
Oceans, and Space at the University of New Hampshire, Dr. Brown
is the Dean of the Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric
Science at the University of Miami, and Ms. Colleton is the
President of the Institute for Global Environmental Strategies,
and is the Executive Director for the Alliance for Earth
Observations. So, you all have added mightily to our knowledge,
and our attempts to try to get this right. So, thank you very
much.
The meeting is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 4 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]