CPs to Solve Competitiveness/Economy/stem advanced Manufacturing Networks cp
Download 0.72 Mb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- Extend: “Solves Earth Science”
- Earth science solves environmental degradation – also allows for socioeconomic gains
- They Say: “Links to Politics”
- There has been bipartisan legislation in the past – doesn’t link to politics
- They Say: “Debris Turn”
Extend: “Solves Education”Funding for NASA is key, it solves education – and senators are against defunding – proves CP is popularGrush 17 (Loren; Currently reporting for ‘The Verge’, graduating from the University of Texas at Austin majoring in Broadcast Journalism and Government; “Cutting NASA’s education funding will hurt workforce, senators argue in open letter”; https://www.theverge.com/2017/5/17/15653992/nasa-office-of-education-budget-senate-open-letter; published 5/17/17; accessed 7/18/17) [TG] A group of senators have an important message for the people who help decide NASA’s budget: don’t cut the space agency’s education funding. In an open letter released today, 32 senators led by Tim Kaine (D-VA) and Tammy Baldwin (D-WI) are calling on members of the Senate Appropriations Committee to keep NASA’s Office of Education intact. That contradicts what President Donald Trump requested in his budget for fiscal year 2018. Overall, Trump’s budget request didn’t slash too much money from NASA’s annual funding, but it did call for the cancellation of some Earth science missions, as well as the complete elimination of NASA’s Office of Education. The reasoning had to do with the office’s strategy and performance, according to the request: “The Office of Education has experienced significant challenges in implementing a NASA-wide education strategy and is performing functions that are duplicative of other parts of the agency.” The request also noted that duties of the office should be taken over by NASA’s Science Mission Directorate instead. That’s what the 32 senators are trying to fight. “Given the importance of STEM education and the success of Hidden Figures, which was recently celebrated by high-ranking members of the Trump Administration at a screening at the Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum, we were disappointed by President Trump’s budget proposal to eliminate funding for NASA’s Office of Education in FY18,” they wrote in today’s letter. The Office of Education, which received $115 million in 2016, is primarily responsible for NASA’s educational outreach programs. It runs the National Space Grant and Fellowship Program, which gives money to students to help them prepare for jobs in aerospace, as well as the Minority University Research and Education Programs, which gives financial aid to minority colleges and institutions. These and other programs are crucial and in need of saving, the senators say. “We recognize that you face significant budget constraints, but we urge you to support the NASA Office of Education because its mission is critical to boosting the nation’s workforce competitiveness,” they wrote. “This funding helps the nation make strides towards equipping students with the skills needed to enter the growing STEM workforce.” Leland Melvin, NASA’s former associate administrator of education and a former astronaut, voiced his support for the letter as well, saying NASA’s education programs are what helped him move ahead in his career. “A skinny black kid from a small southern town, who never imagined working in the space industry, was given an opportunity to do so because of NASA Education,” said Melvin. “The experiences, activities, and inspiration that NASA Education provides to students, teachers, and the community can't be duplicated by any other organization.” Ultimately, NASA’s final budget for fiscal year 2018 won’t be decided until later this year. Appropriators from the Senate will come up with their own budget proposal for NASA, while appropriators from the House will do the same. A final, compromised bill incorporating both the House and Senate proposals will then be voted on by Congress, before it’s signed into law by the president. Extend: “Solves Earth Science”Earth science solves climate shifts – also creates knowledge proliferationWilliamson Et Al 2002 (Ray Williamson; Dr Ray Williamson is the Senior Advisor and former Executive Director of Secure World Foundation. He was formerly Research Professor of Space Policy and International Affairs at the Space Policy Institute, The George Washington University. At the institute, he had led several studies of security issues in space and on the socioeconomic benefits of Earth science and space weather research; Henry R Hertzfeld; Dr. Hertzfeld is an expert in the economic, legal, and policy issues of space and advanced technological development. Dr. Hertzfeld holds a B.A. from the University of Pennsylvania, an M.A. from Washington University, and a Ph.D. degree in economics from Temple University; Joseph Cordes; Professor Joe Cordes joined the George Washington University faculty in 1975. He is Associate Director of the Trachtenberg School and Professor of Economics, Public Policy and Public Administration, and International Affairs. Dr. Cordes was a Brookings Economic Policy fellow in the Office of Tax Policy in the U.S. Department of the Treasury in 1980-81, and served as a senior economist on the Treasury's Tax Reform project in 1984; John M Logsdon; John Logsdon is the founder and from 1987–2008 was the Director of the Space Policy Institute at The George Washington University. In 2003, Logsdon was a member of the Columbia Accident Investigation Board. He is a former member of the NASA Advisory Council. He is frequently cited as an authority on space policy and history by press entities such as The New York Times and The Washington Post, and has appeared on various television networks; “The socioeconomic benefits of Earth science and applications research: reducing the risks and costs of natural disasters in the USA”; accessible online via http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0265964601000571; published February 2002; accessed 7/17/17) [TG] A wealth of satellite data has provided information on weather and climate phenomena for the past 40 years. Within this period, however, the heavy human and economic costs of natural disasters have increased considerably. Using hurricanes, droughts, floods and earthquakes which occurred in the USA as examples, this article describes how Earth science can be applied to such situations to predict or mitigate their effects. The economic value of providing such information is discussed, as are the issues that can affect how successful its provision will be. Since the launch of the US TIROS satellite, the world's first weather satellite in 1961, the United States and other countries have used satellite data to support our understanding of weather and climate. In general, the US federal investment in Earth science research from space, funded primarily through the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), and the US Geological Survey (USGS) has led to an improved understanding of the critical forcing functions behind changes in weather and climate. Earth science research has also resulted in a deeper understanding of the basic characteristics and observable phenomena of earthquakes and volcanic activity, as well as provided insights into the long-term effects of worldwide changes in land cover and land use.2 This research has provided the critical foundation for a wide variety of applications. Scientists can reasonably expect that further investment in Earth science satellite data, modeling, and algorithm development will, among other things, help to improve the ability to predict future weather and climate trends, and the onset of destructive earthquakes and volcanic activity. Such research will also contribute to the development of methods that enable more informed national, local and personal decisions regarding land use and other mitigative or preventative actions. This article reports on the first phase of a research project that will explore the potential long-term socioeconomic benefits of investments in Earth science research. This first phase focuses on relatively short-term, well documented domestic catastrophic events in the United States and its territories. Such a focus has enabled us to concentrate on cases for which the economic and human losses have been identified and quantified with greater certainty than in many other parts of the world. Since only one nation is analyzed, we have available relatively standardized economic measures. Among other things, this analysis examines the economic effects of gaining information that can assist in reducing risk and avoiding losses from catastrophic natural events. Future analysis will explore the socioeconomic benefits of better information about climate variations. In addition, future analysis will expand the geographical coverage to examine the potential benefits of such research to the international community, as well as to the United States. 1. The challenge of natural disasters Changes in our environment can have profound effects on our lives. Severe storms and earthquakes often lead to sudden, extensive losses of property, business disruptions, and even loss of life. More gradual changes of weather and climate, such as drought and desertification, can be just as destructive over longer periods. The interannual cycles of El Niño and La Niña also lead to extremes of drought and precipitation (flooding) that stress communities and significantly affect their economic activities. Earthquakes and volcanic activity also exact major human and economic costs. Changes in the patterns of where we live and the way we live also have a profound effect on the environment and on the magnitude of losses from natural climatological events. The dramatic increase in population density in coastal areas puts more lives and higher value property in the path of hurricanes and cyclones. The growth of industrial society has increased the introduction of potentially harmful chemicals into the atmosphere with possible effects on global temperature and storm patterns. Within the United States and its territories alone, between 1980 and 2001, major weather and climate disasters created losses of more than $248 billion (1998 dollars) and led to the loss of some 690 human lives.3 In that same period, earthquakes and volcanoes cost the United States an additional $41 billion and 193 lives. Some estimations of the costs—economic and otherwise—of natural disasters are presented in Appendix A. Natural disasters in other parts of the world have been even more destructive to human life and national economies. For example, in 1999, hurricane Mitch tore through Central America, leaving an estimated 11,000 people dead and destroying the infrastructure of whole villages and towns. Economic losses were staggering. Hurricane Mitch cost El Salvador close to $1 billion and Honduras more than $4 billion in direct property damage. Agricultural losses resulted in more than $1 billion additional costs for Honduras alone. Effects from the 1999 earthquake in central Turkey killed 15,466 people and led to losses of over $25 billion.4 In many of these cases, the affected regions, especially in developing countries, are ill prepared to cope with the scale and severity of such natural calamities. Not only do they cause great human suffering and severely stress regional economies, they affect the rest of the world as well, both in the direct costs of human and economic assistance and in the interrupted supplies of goods and services in world trade. For example, the disaster assistance rendered by Canada, Europe, and the United States to all Central American countries affected by hurricane Mitch totaled between $720 and $820 million.5 Beyond the loss of life and livelihood, these countries lost thousands of hectares of coffee and banana plantations. One of the most severe climatic phenomena on record was the El Niño/Southern Oscillation (ENSO) event of 1997–1998. In the span of one year, natural disasters attributed to the arrival of El Niño affected more than 129 million people worldwide: an estimated 22,000 people lost their lives, approximately 378,216 were infected with water-and vector-borne diseases, and some 4.6 million people were displaced from their homes. NOAA estimates worldwide economic damage at $36.6 billion.6 In total, more than 22 million acres of forest and agricultural land were lost to fires, floods, and drought (see footnote 5). A study conducted by Munich Reinsurance led to the startling revelation that the number of great natural catastrophes7 worldwide increased fourfold from the 1950s to the 1990s. It also indicated that disasters currently carry a higher price tag than in the past, because the economic losses from natural catastrophes, after adjusting for inflation, increased by an astonishing factor of fourteen within the same timeframe.8
Focus of NASA's Earth Science Program Download full-size image Fig. 1. Focus of NASA's Earth Science Program. Estimating the scale of possible future social and economic benefits from Earth science research is subject to wide uncertainties. Nevertheless, considerable progress has been made in recent years in making such estimates, giving policy makers a much richer foundation upon which to make decisions regarding the potential payoffs from investments in Earth science research than they have had in the past. In particular, because Earth science research can lead to more precise predictions about future environmental changes, local, state, and federal agencies as well as private citizens can benefit from more precise planning and from avoiding certain costs. For example, improved information about the timing of floods helps emergency planners to prepare to meet the challenge these pose to property and human lives. More precise delineation of the extent of possible flood damage can also assist them in deciding who is most at risk and how best to mitigate that risk. It also helps people who confront only low risk hazards to avoid costly preparations they might otherwise be prompted to make in the face of greater uncertainty. 2. Natural disasters and Earth science As noted earlier, the costs of natural disasters can be very high. These investments in Earth science research and applications have led to markedly improved weather forecasts, both in accuracy and in duration. Estimates of the severity, scope, and path of hurricanes, which cost the US economy billions of dollars a year in damages and recovery, have also improved. These improved estimates have allowed local, state, and federal officials to prepare more effectively for their devastating fury. NASA has a comprehensive research program [http://www.earth.nasa.gov] that includes the collection of data from a wide variety of research satellites. Although NASA does not directly support much weather research, many of its climate research programs nonetheless provide the basic research and tools necessary for improving meteorological predictability. Further, NASA develops many of the instruments eventually used by NOAA for its environmental satellite programs. In the paragraphs that follow, we examine several recent natural disasters, suggesting how improved prediction can lead to economic savings. In each of the following cases, we also suggest how the data, information, and analytical tools could benefit planning, response, recovery and mitigation. Although each natural disaster requires different information and analytical tools, there is also considerable overlap. For example, the information required to respond effectively to flooding would also apply to many hurricanes, as flooding is a major result of hurricanes. 2.1. Hurricane Floyd (September 1999) This large, category 2 hurricane struck the Atlantic coast on 16 September 1999 making landfall in eastern North Carolina, where it dropped between 10 and 25 inches of rain in only two days. The resultant flooding caused far greater damage than wind or coastal storm surge. In North Carolina, 7000 homes were destroyed, 17,000 rendered uninhabitable, and 56,000 were damaged. Some 1500 people had to be rescued from flood waters. Pitt County, NC alone experienced damage costing an estimated $1.6 billion. Some 51 people died in storm-related deaths in North Carolina. The Outer Banks, low-lying barrier islands, suffered serious beach erosion, and 500,000 people went without electrical power for periods lasting from days to weeks. Additional, less damaging flooding occurred in South Carolina, Virginia, Maryland, Pennsylvania, New York, New Jersey, Delaware, Rhode Island, Connecticut, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and Vermont. In all, Hurricane Floyd caused an estimated $6.0 billion damage and was directly implicated in 77 deaths.9 2.1.1. Applications of Earth science research to effects of hurricanes The data, information, and analytical tools developed in Earth science research are potentially applicable in all phases of a hurricane, from initial planning to recovery and future mitigation. The following offers examples from among many of the sorts of assistance these outcomes of Earth science can provide: •Planning. As a result of R&D over the past 30 years, regions that are prone to hurricane impacts now have a variety of satellite and airborne data and geospatial tools to map the region and delineate areas particularly prone to impacts, including low-lying barrier islands and river drainages. In this effort, airborne lidar is particularly valuable for creating a detailed digital terrain map. Models developed using techniques developed by NASA and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) of the potential extent of storm surges in fragile coastal areas can be especially important for emergency planners. Remote sensing analysis of the road networks would enhance the ability of emergency vehicles to reach people in the response phase. Such advanced planning may not only save lives, but also reduce the costs of emergency evacuation during the hurricane. •Response. Satellite and airborne-derived maps are especially important for assessing the extent and severity of damage following a hurricane and planning the most effective response, including transportation lifelines. •Recovery and mitigation. During the recovery period and later, the experiences with the hurricane will indicate areas that are especially vulnerable to wind and rain damage. One of the most important efforts during this period is to attempt to improve planning to avoid future damage. Modeling using Earth science data and modeling tools can help local, state, and federal policy makers develop more effective building codes or indicate areas where development would create potential high risks of loss.
The drought of 2000 began in the early spring, when the customary spring rains did not materialize in many areas. By the end of August, after months of dry weather and unusually hot temperatures, some 35% of the country had experienced severe to extreme drought. The drought was most severe in the West and Southwest, but it had a major impact on the Southeast United States as well. The drought caused about $4 billion in damage and associated costs and contributed to an estimated 140 deaths, nationwide.10 In the West, the drought, coupled with frequent high winds, led to the worst wildfire season in 50 years. Among the most destructive fire was the Cerro Gordo fire around Los Alamos, New Mexico fire, which threatened the Los Alamos National Laboratory and destroyed 235 nearby homes and other structures.11 Fires throughout the west caused an estimated $2 billion in damage and costs related to fighting fires. Fortunately, no lives were lost.
Here again, the products of Earth science research can help local communities prepare more effectively to cope with drought and the conditions that support wildfires. Satellite and airborne sensors developed for scientific research gather data on soil moisture, water reserves, vegetation biomass, and evaporation rates, enabling an area-wide survey of drought conditions as they develop. Predictive models developed using these and other data can be used to create forecasts of future precipitation rates and magnitudes. Extrapolation of these models to soil moisture and evaporation rates allows emergency response teams to plan for potential future fires. 2.3. Flooding in the Northern Plains, April, May 1997 During April and May of 1997, unusually warm temperatures led to an early heavy snowmelt, creating severe flooding along several rivers in North and South Dakota and Minnesota. Grand Forks, North Dakota was particularly hard hit by the flood, leading to evacuation of much of the downtown, lost crops, and damaged or destroyed homes and businesses. The overall economic toll in direct damage, lost business income, and cleanup costs reached about $3.7 billion. Eleven people lost their lives to the flooding.12 2.3.1. Applications of Earth science to the effects of floods With better information, the rate and extent of flooding can be predicted with considerable accuracy, allowing communities to prepare for the high water. The data products from Earth science research allow the creation of detailed topographic maps, land cover characterization, the extent and depth of snow cover, snow melt rates, and the amount and rate of precipitation. The analytical tools and modeling capabilities allow the development of hydrologic models, predicting the direction and speed of storms, and the dynamic modeling of floods as they develop. 2.4. Northridge, CA earthquake: 17 January 1994 The earthquake that struck Northridge in 1994 measured 6.7 on the Richter scale, causing extensive damage over an area of some 2192 square miles in Los Angeles, Ventura, and Orange counties. Nearly 12,000 people required hospital treatment, and 72 lost their lives. The damage reached about $25 billion, with additional losses from reduced productivity and lost business. The Federal government alone spent $12.5 billion on response and recovery.13 2.4.1. Application of Earth science to the effects of earthquakes Although the science of earthquake prediction is in its infancy compared with the ability to predict the tracks and destructive damage of hurricanes, making preparation for a specific earthquake impossible at the present time, there is nevertheless much that can be done to prepare for a cost-effective response to a possible future destructive earthquake [2]. Most regions prone to earthquakes are well known. Preparation derived from Earth science research includes the development of accurate topographic maps, including land cover types, urban features, and transportation lifelines. Modeling of alternate transportation routing assists in the recovery from the damaging effects of earthquakes. In addition, techniques developed to further solid Earth science can be used to follow possible local surface deformations and fault movement, which may indicate areas of particular surface stress. 3. The economic value of better information Providing better information about the onset and consequence of natural disasters can provide tangible economic benefits to governments, individuals, and businesses. These benefits come about in several different ways. 3.1. Reducing uncertainty More accurate, precise information can be used to reduce uncertainty about future events. For example, more accurate predictions about future weather and climate enable farmers and agribusinesses to estimate future crop yields, leading to reduced uncertainty about yields and prices. In economic terms, this can translate into more predictable crop prices by reducing fluctuations in the futures market, and help farmers, food producers, and food processors (among others) plan their business operations more efficiently. The Caribbean Island of Guadeloupe is attempting to supply more of its power through utilizing its abundant wind, solar and water resources. Because fluctuating wind and cloud cover reduces the contribution that wind and solar generation can make to the island's total needs, detailed local forecasting would assist the island in managing those resources more effectively, thus boosting potential power generation [3]. 3.2. Information as a commodity Information can be a commodity bought and sold on the market. Although the government produces free weather forecasts as a public good, private companies also make a profit developing and selling detailed, enhanced forecasts to a variety of industries. For example, to the energy generation industry, improving the predictive ability of forecasts by an average of only one degree can result in more efficient use of power generating resources and save hundreds of thousands of dollars each year for electric utilities [4]. Many utilities employ their own forecasters at a high annual cost because of these potential large savings. 3.3. Information as knowledge Information also provides the backbone of human knowledge. Libraries, computer databases, data archives, textbooks, etc. all are storehouses of information and have economic value. It is possible to develop many specific examples in each of these categories that apply to information derived from the data and analytic tools developed through Earth science research. However, information has no value unless it is made available to potential users and then put to use, whether for economic gain, education, entertainment, or to further scientific research. Hence, an important part of the task of making the results of Earth science research useful is to develop and disseminate specific applications in each category. After information is disseminated, it is quite easily transmitted and copied. For public good applications, such as responding to natural disasters, this capability is a marked benefit to society. However, the market value of information is immediately diminished after it is released unless the originator can acquire some method of retaining control, such as copyright or licensing. In general, therefore, information is not a single commodity whose worth can be easily evaluated. Each type of information is unique and often even the value is dependent on who receives the information and when as well as what actions are taken as a result of having the information on a timely basis.
Along with numerous organizations globally, NASA has been a key contributor to the wealth of data and information about the Earth and its processes. In addition, NASA has helped advance global knowledge about effective ways to apply the data and information across sectors and thematic areas. There are countless examples on how organizations have and are using Earth observations to support specific analyses, decisions, and associated actions. Many of these examples have been qualitative and anecdotal. The substantiation of Earth observation benefits in societal and economic terms poses key challenges, yet this quantitative substantiation is of strategic importance to the Earth observation community as it expands efforts to inform decisions. It is at the heart of the value proposition. In addition, it comes at a time when there are increasing efforts to encourage greater integration of the social and economic sciences with natural sciences as well as global efforts to use data and indicators to address sustainability. This chapter describes NASA’s work to enable uses and applications of Earth observations, as well as efforts to quantify the socioeconomic impact and showcase the overall value of space-based observations. 4.2 Earth Science and Applications One of NASA’s agency-wide goals is to “advance understanding of Earth and develop technologies to improve the quality of life on our home planet” (NASA 2014). NASA’s Earth Science Program supports fundamental and applied research on the Earth system, discovering new insights about the planet and the complex interactions within the Earth system. Using the vantage point from space, global perspectives enable NASA to provide a broad, integrated set of high-quality data covering all parts of the planet. NASA shares this unique information openly with the global community, including members of the science, government, industry, education, and policy-maker communities (NASA 2014). Within NASA Earth Science, its Applied Sciences Program is a dedicated effort to promote innovative and practical uses of Earth observations. The Program supports applied research and applications projects to enable near-term uses of Earth observations that inform organizations’ decisions and that build key capabilities in the Earth science community and broader global workforce. Projects are carried out in partnership with private and public-sector organizations to achieve sustained uses and benefits from Earth observations. The Program addresses technical and human barriers to the use of new data and tools, creating new knowledge about effective methods and processes for applying Earth science (e.g., Hossain 2014). 4.3 Inform Decisions Within the scientific community, the identification of the human role in and impacts on the Earth system have grown significantly. There are clear human dimensions to physical and biological parameters, such as air quality conditions and land use patterns. With this recognition have come numerous efforts supporting greater integration of natural and social sciences. A U.S. National Academy of Sciences report suggested efforts “to facilitate crosscutting research focused on understanding the interaction among the climate, human, and environmental systems …” (NRC 2009). The Future Earth initiative stemmed from the proposal for “a new contract between science and society in recognition that science must inform policy to make more wise and timely decisions …” (ICSU 2012). In the U.S., the Obama Administration directed U.S. Federal agencies in 2015 to factor the value of ecosystem services into Federal planning and decision-making (OMB 2015). The U.S. Global Change Research Program’s (USGCRP) 2012 Strategic Plan also included an objective on greater integration with social, behavioral, and economic sciences (USGCRP 2012). This integration also offers significant opportunities to improve decision-making. Knowledge from the decision sciences, economics, and other social sciences can support ways to better incorporate Earth observations into analyses used for policy and business management decisions. Notably, the USGCRP’s Strategic Plan introduced a goal focused on informing decisions for the first time in the USGCRP’s history. The language of policy and business management is often an economics-based lexicon. The integration will require adjustments within the natural science and Earth observation communities (Mooney 2013). However, the integration can help the Earth observation community gain skills to articulate its value and improve its support to decision-making. It is with these trends that NASA has supported significant efforts to quantify the socioeconomic benefits of Earth observation applications and build familiarity within the Earth observation community. 4.4 Socioeconomic Benefits of Earth Observations As suggested, national and international organizations are placing greater emphasis on the benefits achievable from applications of Earth observations. The determination of specific societal and economic impacts, especially quantitatively, can be challenging, yet these determinations are critical to the value proposition of Earth observations and to induce greater use. NASA Earth Science and its Applied Sciences Program have supported numerous studies to assess and document the benefits of Earth observations for decision-making. NASA has and continues to advance analytic techniques and quantitative methodologies for determining socioeconomic impacts across a range of themes. Some of the socioeconomic studies that the Applied Sciences Program has sponsored include Disasters: Volcanic ash and aviation safety; Water: Improving water quality management; Health: Malaria early warning using Earth observations; Drought: Value of information for the U.S. Drought Monitor; Ecosystems: Fisheries management and pelagic habitats; Air Quality: Enhancements to the BlueSky emissions assessment system; Wildfires: Benefits of BlueSky for smoke management and air quality; and, Air Quality: Earth observations and the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) AIRNow system. The following are summaries of two project-impact studies that the Applied Sciences Program has sponsored; the information is paraphrased from the authors’ reports and also appeared on the program’s website. 4.4.1 Earth Observations and Air Quality Air pollutants can cause significant short-term- and long-term effects to human health. The U.S. EPA operates the AIRNow air quality system, which health officials use to alert the public about hazardous pollution. A NASA-sponsored project pursued the use of Aura, Aqua, and Terra data within the EPA AIRNow air quality system. By incorporating the Earth observations into AIRNow, EPA could expand the system’s coverage to reach millions of people not currently covered by the network of ground-based air quality monitors. In the project’s economic impact report, the analysis involved two approaches: face-to-face interviews in three case study locations (Denver, Colorado; Atlanta, Georgia; and Kansas City, Missouri) to assess the public value or community-level benefits and analysis of cost savings from the use of satellite data instead of installing new monitors to provide air quality information for public health decisions to populations in currently unmonitored locations. The study found that the addition of satellite data could provide daily particulate matter information to 82% of people living in currently unmonitored locations (approximately 15 million people); the study estimated that the capability represents a value of about USD 26 million. The three case studies also identified nonmonetary value and benefits. Interviewees reported reduced adverse health impacts on sensitive populations resulting from more accurate air pollution warnings and health alerts, and increased public viewing and understanding of air quality maps on AIRNow because of greatly increased spatial coverage. They also reported increased media use of AIRNow air quality maps resulting from expanded geographic coverage; more comprehensive air quality stories available to the media because of improved geographical representation of pollutant transport resulting from unusual events; and better communication with the public about the spatial distribution of air pollution, especially in sparsely monitored areas, resulting in better public understanding of these issues. 4.4.2 Volcanic Ash, Earth Observations, and Aviation Safety Large volcanic eruptions can eject ash to heights at which commercial aircraft normally fly. Volcanic ash can cause damage to engines and fuselages, making it necessary to reroute, delay, or cancel flights to protect aircraft and ensure passenger safety. The international aviation community uses information and warnings from nine Volcanic Ash Advisory Centers (VAAC) on the location of volcanic ash. In 2010, Iceland’s Eyjafjallajökull volcano erupted, sending volcanic ash into European airspace and canceling flights. European VAACs had not used Aura data, and a NASA-sponsored project team developed and delivered data products within days of the eruption. European officials used the Aura products in their determinations of which airspace to open. An impact analysis analyzed the benefits of the project and VAAC’s use of Aura data. One part focused on the benefits from use following the Eyjafjallajökull eruption, and one part focused on a global estimate of average annual benefits. The analysis team used data on flight cancelations and revenue losses due to Eyjafjallajökull, historical frequencies of aircraft damage from volcanic ash, and aircraft repair costs. The team estimated how much the Aura data would reduce the uncertainty about the level of ash threat, determining a risk-adjusted value of the observations. Overall, the analysis found that the satellite data reduced the probability of an aircraft experiencing a volcanic ash incident by approximately 12%. The team estimated that use of the data following the Eyjafjallajökull eruption saved USD 25–72 million in avoided revenue losses due to unnecessary delays and avoided aircraft damage costs. If the data had been used from the beginning of the incident, an estimated additional USD 132 million in losses and costs might have been avoided. The team extrapolated the risk-adjusted results globally to estimate the potential annual impact from the use of Earth observations by VAACs. Accounting for annual frequency and magnitude of volcanic eruptions, the team estimated an expected value of up to USD 10 million annually. 4.5 Sustainable Development Goals These efforts to measure the impacts of Earth observations on decision-making mirrors and aligns with other endeavors globally to use data to advance social, economic, and environmental progress. Most notable are the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals. In 2015, the United Nations endorsed Transforming Our World: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, a global development agenda for all countries and stakeholders to use as a blueprint for progress on sustainability. The 2030 Agenda specifically calls for new data acquisition and exploitation of a wide range of data sources to support implementation, including a specific reference to Earth observations and geospatial information. Thus, the 2030 Agenda represents a key opportunity for Earth observations to play insightful roles in monitoring targets, planning, and tracking progress that can contribute toward achieving the goals. The long-term collection of data on the goals provides worldwide opportunities to produce examples and further develop analytic methods on the socioeconomic benefits of Earth observations. They Say: “Links to Politics”Trump is pushing NASA research – it doesn’t solve the CP though because the CP is contextual to Earth Science not space explorationKaplan 17 (Sarah; Currently reporting for the Washington Post, graduated with a Bachelor’s in International Cultures and Politics from Georgetown University; “Trump signs NASA bill aimed at sending people to Mars”; https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/speaking-of-science/wp/2017/03/21/trump-signs-nasa-bill-aimed-at-landing-on-mars/?utm_term=.e30c953fa28c; published 3/21/17; accessed 7/17/17) [TG] President Trump just signed a bill authorizing $19.5 billion in funding for NASA — the first such authorization bill for the space agency in seven years. The bill more or less aligns with the budget blueprint Trump laid out last week. NASA won't face the same cuts as other science and medical agencies, which stand to lose huge portions of their budget under the president's proposal. Sending humans to Mars by the 2030s remains NASA's long-term goal, and Congress will continue to fund the construction of the Space Launch System rocket and Orion crew capsule for that mission. “I think it's really more of a vote for stability,” said Scott Pace, director of the Space Policy Institute at George Washington University. He noted that the passage of the last NASA authorization bill in 2010 was fairly chaotic, since it involved ending the Constellation program that would have sent astronauts to the moon. This year's bill left NASA's Earth science budget untouched — for now. Earth science would see a 5 percent cut in the president's blueprint, and Trump made clear Tuesday that he thinks NASA should be focused on deep space, not Earth. “It's been a long time since a bill like this has been signed reaffirming our national commitment to the core mission of NASA, human space exploration, space science and technology,” he said. Later he added, “We support jobs. It's about jobs.” The bill, which was passed with bipartisan support, can be read in full here. Here are highlights from the bill signing: There has been bipartisan legislation in the past – doesn’t link to politicsThomas 17 (will; Will earned his B.A. in History from Northwestern University, with a minor in physics, and received a Ph.D. from Harvard University in the History of Science. He then held a postdoc position with the AIP Center for History of Physics and was a Junior Research Fellow at Imperial College London, working on the intersections between science and policy. His book, Rational Action The Sciences of Policy in Britain and America, 1940-1960, was published by MIT Press in 2015; “Congress Passes Bipartisan NASA Authorization Legislation”; https://www.aip.org/fyi/2017/congress-passes-bipartisan-nasa-authorization-legislation; published 3/9/17; accessed 7/13/17) [TG] If they ask why that bill doesn’t solve the CP you say that the legislation was about space exploration, so it doesn’t solve the CP, just proves that it has worked in the past On March 7, the House passed the bipartisan “NASA Transition Authorization Act” on a voice vote. Late last year, Congress nearly passed a very similar bill introduced before the November election to help ensure continuity during the impending changeover in presidential administration. The legislation is motivated in part by memories of the Obama administration’s cancellation of the Constellation rocket program in 2010 and its reorientation of NASA’s human exploration efforts from a near-term moon mission to a Mars mission to occur in the 2030s. To ensure a smooth passage, negotiators from each congressional chamber finalized the language in this year’s version of the bill prior to its introduction in the Senate in February. The Senate approved the bill by unanimous consent the same day it was introduced, and it now heads to President Trump for his signature. The bill’s success stems from agreement in both parties that new disruptions in NASA’s policy would be detrimental to the agency’s work and to national interests — an issue recently revisited at a House Science Committee hearing. Nevertheless, there remain simmering disagreements over certain questions that the legislation does not resolve, such as the weight NASA should give to its Earth science activities. Bill affirms priorities in exploration and science Key elements of current space policy were enshrined in the NASA Authorization Act of 2010, the most recent comprehensive legislative policy guidance for the agency. The new authorization bill affirms congressional support for current goals, and provides updated guidance on a variety of NASA activities and missions, including some of its scientific work. The main focus of the bill is NASA’s work to revive and extend its human spaceflight program. It endorses the goal of sending astronauts to Mars in the 2030s and the ongoing development of the Space Launch System rocket and the Orion crew vehicle. It also authorizes the extension of International Space Station operations until at least 2024 and support for the development of a commercial capability to transport astronauts to low-Earth orbit. The bill also affirms congressional support for several major NASA science missions currently in development: the James Webb Space Telescope, the Mars 2020 rover, the Wide-Field Infrared Survey Telescope, and the Europa Clipper, which has just moved into its design phase. In addition, the bill provides backing for astrobiology research, near-Earth objects surveys, and the airborne SOFIA observatory. It calls for new studies of radioisotope power systems and NASA’s “architecture” for robotic Mars exploration, as well as for a strategy for the ongoing search for exoplanets. And, following the recommendation of a recent National Academies study, it places NASA’s senior reviews of science mission extensions on a triennial rather than a biennial schedule. By and large, the language in this year’s bill is identical to that in last year’s version, the science provisions of which are summarized in additional detail in FYI 2016 #158. Analysis of the changes that were made in this year’s version can be found on pages 12 to 15 of SpacePolicyOnline’s fact sheet for NASA’s fiscal year 2017 budget request. Ongoing tensions surface in interpretations of provisions Members of both parties greeted the bill’s passage, welcoming the stability in mission planning that it will provide for NASA. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX), the bill’s primary Senate sponsor, lauded its importance both for NASA and his home state, saying in a statement, With the passage of this bipartisan legislation, the future of the U.S. space program is now more secure and stable, and we have provided much-needed certainty to the missions of the International Space Station and Johnson Space Center. We are also making a serious commitment to the manned exploration of space, laying the groundwork for the mission to Mars, and enabling commercial space ventures to flourish. Speaking on the House floor in support of the bill, Science Committee Chairman Lamar Smith (R-TX) drew attention to its addition of a new fundamental objective for NASA, “the search for life’s origin, evolution, distribution, and future in the universe,” and noted the contributions of the Europa mission and the exoplanet strategy to that objective. Smith is a strong supporter of astrobiology research. However, partisan tensions over NASA’s scientific work manifested in some lawmakers’ interpretation of certain provisions in the bill. Apparently referencing section 517, a short provision pertaining to NASA’s development of sensors and performance of measurements for other agencies, Smith observed, Part of achieving success in space exploration is making sure that NASA is not burdened with funding other agency missions. For example, there are 17 agencies with the responsibility for studying climate change, but only one agency, NASA, is responsible for space exploration. This bill directs the NASA administrator to seek reimbursement whenever responsibilities are transferred to NASA from another agency or when NASA funds another agency’s activities. It is unclear exactly what implications this provision could have for the distribution of responsibilities and transfer of funds among federal research agencies, but the question is certainly a sensitive one. The Science Committee majority has been seeking for some time to “rebalance” NASA’s mission portfolio to emphasize exploration and to deemphasize Earth science. And in November, an adviser to President Trump on space policy sparked widespread concern by suggesting NASA’s Earth science activities be altogether transferred to other agencies. This past week, it emerged that the Trump administration may seek to cut the budget of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration — a leader in the government’s weather, climate, and oceans research effort — by 17 percent, which would impinge on its ability to make any new payments to NASA. In her own floor speech, the Science Committee’s ranking member, Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson (D-TX), said she is pleased with the bill, but was disappointed in its lack of clarity concerning NASA’s science portfolio. She remarked, It is not a perfect bill. It does not directly address all of NASA’s science programs, namely Earth Science and Heliophysics. Those provide the space-based measurements to help scientists understand the Earth’s systems and changing climate, to predict space weather events, which can have a devastating impact on our terrestrial infrastructure. They Say: “Debris Turn”No Debris DA – NASA is key to solve debris – Avoidance maneuvers and evasive actionsGarcia 13 (Mark; Currently the Deputy Mission Manager at the NASA Jet Propulsion Labatory, and conducted the 2007 Mars Rover Mission, graduated from Stanford University in 1992 with a M.S in Aeronautics and Astronautics; “Space Debris and Human Spacecraft”; https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/station/news/orbital_debris.html; published 9/26/13; accessed 7/26/17) [TG] Planning for and Reacting to Debris NASA has a set of long-standing guidelines that are used to assess whether the threat of such a close pass is sufficient to warrant evasive action or other precautions to ensure the safety of the crew. These guidelines essentially draw an imaginary box, known as the “pizza box" because of its flat, rectangular shape, around the space vehicle. This box is about a mile deep by 30 miles across by 30 miles long (1.5 x 50 x 50 kilometers), with the vehicle in the center. When predictions indicate that the debris will pass close enough for concern and the quality of the tracking data is deemed sufficiently accurate, Mission Control centers in Houston and Moscow work together to develop a prudent course of action. Sometimes these encounters are known well in advance and there is time to move the station slightly, known as a “debris avoidance maneuver” to keep the debris outside of the box. Other times, the tracking data isn’t precise enough to warrant such a maneuver or the close pass isn’t identified in time to make the maneuver. In those cases, the control centers may agree that the best course of action is to move the crew into the Soyuz spacecraft that are used to transport humans to and from the station. This allows enough time to isolate those spaceships from the station by closing hatches in the event of a damaging collision. The crew would be able to leave the station if the collision caused a loss of pressure in the life-supporting module or damaged critical components. The Soyuz act as lifeboats for crew members in the event of an emergency. Mission Control also has the option of taking additional precautions, such as closing hatches between some of the station’s modules, if the likelihood of a collision is great enough. Maneuvering Spacecraft to Avoid Orbital Debris NASA has a set of long-standing guidelines that are used to assess whether the threat of a close approach of orbital debris to a spacecraft is sufficient to warrant evasive action or precautions to ensure the safety of the crew. Debris avoidance maneuvers are planned when the probability of collision from a conjunction reaches limits set in the space shuttle and space station flight rules. If the probability of collision is greater than 1 in 100,000, a maneuver will be conducted if it will not result in significant impact to mission objectives. If it is greater than 1 in 10,000, a maneuver will be conducted unless it will result in additional risk to the crew. Debris avoidance maneuvers are usually small and occur from one to several hours before the time of the conjunction. Debris avoidance maneuvers with the shuttle can be planned and executed in a matter of hours. Such maneuvers with the space station require about 30 hours to plan and execute mainly due to the need to use the station’s Russian thrusters, or the propulsion systems on one of the docked Russian or European spacecraft. Several collision avoidance maneuvers with the shuttle and the station have been conducted during the past 10 years. NASA implemented the conjunction assessment and collision avoidance process for human spaceflight beginning with shuttle mission STS-26 in 1988. Before launch of the first element of the International Space Station in 1998, NASA and DoD jointly developed and implemented a more sophisticated and higher fidelity conjunction assessment process for human spaceflight missions. In 2005, NASA implemented a similar process for selected robotic assets such as the Earth Observation System satellites in low Earth orbit and Tracking and Data Relay Satellite System in geosynchronous orbit. In 2007, NASA extended the conjunction assessment process to all NASA maneuverable satellites within low Earth orbit and within 124 miles (200 kilometers) of geosynchronous orbit. DoD’s Joint Space Operations Center (JSpOC) is responsible for performing conjunction assessments for all designated NASA space assets in accordance with an established schedule (every eight hours for human spaceflight vehicles and daily Monday through Friday for robotic vehicles). JSpOC notifies NASA (Johnson Space Center for human spaceflight and Goddard Space Flight Center for robotic missions) of conjunctions which meet established criteria. JSpOC tasks the Space Surveillance Network to collect additional tracking data on a threat object to improve conjunction assessment accuracy. NASA computes the probability of collision, based upon miss distance and uncertainty provided by JSpOC. Based upon specific flight rules and detailed risk analysis, NASA decides if a collision avoidance maneuver is necessary. If a maneuver is required, NASA provides planned post-maneuver orbital data to JSpOC for screening of near-term conjunctions. This process can be repeated if the planned new orbit puts the NASA vehicle at risk of future collision with the same or another space object. Directory: file -> view view -> Western Europe after wwii view -> Author study: paul fleischman view -> Qpa1 7ela study Guide view -> Arctic Oil/Gas Neg view -> November 1970 Approximately 150,000-500,000 deaths Bhola Cyclone Bangladesh view -> Grade Level: 6 Unit of Study: Caribbean glce view -> Citation: Duffield, Katy view -> Table of Contents Lesson # view -> Chinese Wind Energy Disad Download 0.72 Mb. Share with your friends:
|