Endi 2011 / Daniel/Jason/Kevin/Marc/MiHe/Parth/Simrun
Download 0.51 Mb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- IL – Tradeoff
IL – Military ReadinessJoint Polar Satellite System help military troops, water quality, and make natural disasters less severe McEntee 7/3 – Executive director and chief executive of the American Geophysical Union. (The Washington Post, “The Importance of the Weather Satellite,” July 3, 2011, http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-importance-of-the-weather-satellite/2011/06/30/AGDTPuwH_story.html) mihe As Stephen Stromberg pointed out in his June 30 PostPartisan [“Don’t gut the Weather Service”], allowing funding for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s Joint Polar Satellite System (JPSS) to fall victim to political debate will negatively affect weather forecasting abilities. What he did not mention were the far-reaching consequences of such a scenario. The satellite’s data will continue to help military planners deploy troops; emergency managers fight wildfires and respond to other disasters; and farmers to plan for optimum planting. He also did not mention that this penny-wise, pound-foolish budgeting approach doesn’t just stop with JPSS funding. Results from cuts to science funding could also limit our ability to assess water quality and mitigate the impacts of natural disasters. We need to reduce the national debt, but it would be a mistake to do that by sacrificing programs that protect public safety and national security and support global competitiveness. Polar Satellite System key to military readiness, crops, public safety, hurricane and weather tracking USA Today 6/17 — (Bart Jansen, “Looming gap in weather satellites threatens forecasting,” June 17, 2011, http://www.usatoday.com/weather/news/2011-06-17-weather-satellite-budget-cuts_n.htm) mihe The program is crucial for weather forecasting because polar satellites circle Earth every 90 minutes, scanning the entire planet twice every day. By flying only 517 miles above the surface, polar satellites give a sharper view than stationary satellites that float 22,300 miles above a specific place. NOAA satellites share weather duties with the Defense Department and European satellites. But the one at stake in the current budget debate is responsible for the afternoon orbit, which is more important for weather, while Defense focuses on the morning orbit, which is more important for the military. "There will be a data gap. That data gap will have very serious consequences to our ability to do severe storm warnings, long-term weather forecasts, search and rescue and good weather forecasts," Jane Lubchenco, NOAA administrator, told members of a Senate Appropriations subcommittee April 13. A polar satellite detects when ingredients such as moisture and winds look ripe for storms. The weather service then posts "outlooks" warning five to eight days ahead of possible violent storms. On storm day, the service's Storm Prediction Center posts "watches" several hours ahead. "The satellites are an important part of that early warning process," said Christopher Vaccaro, a spokesman for the service. Without the replacement polar satellite, forecasters would have half the information to track the moisture and wind patterns that percolate into violent storms. Lubchenco said without information from the polar satellite, forecasts for a massive storm nicknamed "snowmageddon," which hit Washington in February 2010, would have had the location wrong by 200 to 300 miles and would have underestimated the snowfall by 10 inches. Hurricane tracking would also suffer, she said. "Our severe storm warnings will be seriously degraded," Lubchenco testified April 1 before the House Appropriations subcommittee governing the agency. Lawmakers and scientists lauded the value of the program, which provides forecasts for military troop deployments, ocean search-and-rescue missions and farmers tending crops. "It's important for public safety," said Christine McEntee, executive director of theAmerican Geophysical Union. Cutting the funding "would be penny-wise and pound-foolish." "That's saving lives, that's saving money," said Rep. Chaka Fattah of Pennsylvania, the top Democrat on the House panel that oversees NOAA funding. IL – TradeoffCurrent NOAA budget prioritized – plan results in tradeoffs NOAA.gov 3/14/11 –(NOAA. Gov, “FY 2012 Budget highlights” http://www.corporateservices.noaa.gov/nbo/fy12_bluebook/chapter1_2012_BudgetHighlights.pdf) Along with this reorganization, NOAA is proposing a variety of activities that support the Administration’s economic and environmental priorities, including winning the future through innovation, strengthening research and development, and the National Ocean Policy. This budget request is the result of a rigorous review and prioritization of the agency’s programs and activities. Low priority programs or activities have been curtailed or eliminated, core functions and services are sustained, and increases are requested for only the most critical programs, projects, or activities necessary to meet the growing demand for NOAA’s services. The additional resources requested in this budget will improve NOAA’s prediction of high impact weather and water events; manage ocean and coastal resources; deliver safe, efficient, and environmentally sound transportation; and maintain and expand the technical infrastructure that supports NOAA’s mission. NOAA budget prioritizes, causing trade-offs Cereghino 8-(Paul estuary and Salmon Restoration Program at Pudget sound nearshore partnership which advises the NOAA budget http://www.pugetsoundnearshore.org/background_papers/sc_aug2008.pdf)jc Appendix B. NOAA Community-based Nearshore Restoration Fund Through interagency agreements, WDFW has developed relationships with other funders that allow for joint funding of projects of shared interest. The first of these interagency agreements has been developed with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association’s Restoration Center. Through the NOAA Nearshore Fund, Federal and State resources are combined to implement on-the-ground restoration activities that engage communities. Additional eligibility criteria and review processes are developed as part of this partnership to govern distribution of NOAA funds across the ESRP Annual Spending Plan. Appendix C. Project Scoping Guidelines Project scoping guidelines assist applicants in developing proposals that contain a single discrete restoration or protection ‘project’. Creating a standard for project definition improves our ability to ESRP Strategy and Guidance WORKING DRAFT Page 12 evaluate status, track progress, and compare costs and benefits among proposals. Project scoping guidelines are used to identify a final ‘whole project scope’ at the end of proposal negotiation to be included in an Annual Spending Plan. Appendix D. Project Status Categories A project is assigned to a status category based on work completed to date. A critical threshold is completion of feasibility and an associated conceptual design. Projects with feasibility complete can be further divided into projects that are in design, implementation, or evaluation phases. These categories define the deliverables that document project work. Proposal reviewers evaluate evidence to confirm proposed project status. The first task of a contract is to document completion of previous phases. Appendix E. New Project Ranking Criteria New projects are evaluated by a technical review team using criteria that compare potential benefits to likely costs. Benefit analysis considers likelihood of self-sustained outcomes in alignment with regional goals, as well as potential for learning and public outreach. Cost considers whole project cost including potential for leverage and risks of project failure. The project ranking is maintained throughout the portfolio development process. Project ranking criteria are a critical expression of program goals. Appendix F. Portfolio Ranking Criteria Once a project has completed feasibility and received phased funding for design, construction, or evaluation phases, it may be classified as a ‘portfolio project’ and receive special consideration for continued funding. Prioritization of funding portfolio projects is based on completion of planned work, readiness to proceed, financial leverage opportunities, urgency of funding need, as well as the strategic rank which carries over from new project ranking. The allocation of available funds between new projects and portfolio projects is a critical policy decision by the Steering Committee that occurs during development of the Annual Spending Plan 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 0.51 Mb. Share with your friends:
|