the same time, as the reports you are familiar with have made clear, we are not sufficiently aware of the basic mechanics of environmentin this instance, of cloud physics and the processes by which precipitation forms to devise an immediate plan for the most efficient exploitation of this resource. Herein lies our dilemma and a potential danger to our civilization. The sum is the sole supplier of energy to the earth, its oceans, and atmosphere. Outer space is the energy sink in which energy is lost by thermal radiation. Between these is a delicately balanced environment whose preservation is essential to man's survival. This system is not uniformly in balance but contains many instabilities. The Academy's Panel on Weather and Climate Modification has pointed out how triggering a reaction in one unstable situation might escalate a transfer of energy from one instability to another, resulting in a major effect on climate. That man can inadvertently modify his climate looms as a possibility to be considered with all its hazards and implications. You have read last week in The Washington Post for March 15 of an interview with Dr. Reid Bryson of the University of Wisconsin where he told of the effects of dust in the atmosphere above the Great Indian Desert preventing precipitation over the desert. Bryson and his collaborators have found that the dust affects the flow of radiation-heat and light-through the atmosphere. One of the consequences of the change is that the direct infrared cooling rate of the atmosphere at altitudes near the middle of the troposphere is increased abnormally, thereby increasing the subsidence, or descent, of cool middle tropospheric air. An Indian scientist has shown that the descent of such air in this manner has a tendency to suppress precipitation. There is some archeological evidence showing that the Indian Desert, from which a large fraction of the dust comes, was at one time covered by vegetation and that the removal of the vegetation cover and the introduction of desert conditions resulted at least in part from farming practices introduced by early man. Thus, there is reasonable evidence that the desert, once established with man's inadvertent help, is at least partly self-sustaining. Bryson conjectures that by proper efforts some of the desert could be converted into new, productive farmlands and at the same time by covering the areas with vegetation reduce the release of dust. However, he warns that further research is necessary in order to determine the effect upon the vital monsoon rains in the rest of India of manipulation of local weather over the desert. I may suggest that today climatic changes are underway perhaps so subtly that they have not yet been detected. Certainly the magnitude and character of our disruption of the ecology of the great western plains of the United States and the African veldts are conducive to a modified climate, as are the enormous population belts of our two coasts with their uncalculated transformations of fuels into heat, carbon dioxide, and water vapor. And I have recently seen the commencement of yet another possible triggering of climatic change in Patagonia, where the virgin timber is being burned over on an awesome scale to provide sheep pasturage. Just as Bryson has examined the characteristic feature of the climate. of the great Indian desert by uniting meteorologists, paleogeographers, physicists, archeologists, and historians into a team of research workers, so must we combine a broad range of scientific and technical forces in the physical sciences, biological sciences, social sciences, and engineering in order to cope with what appear to be emerging as the central scientific problems of the immediate future. To the increasing alarm of scientists, among others, the magniture of environmental problems is becoming more apparent with each day. How do we go about developing an understanding of our environment adequate to insure detection of changes resulting from cultural influences before they become significant to the future of our culture? How do we predict man's influence on the environment well enough to provide a basis for decisions on resources utilization? In the immediate future, a continuation of research and experimentation in the laboratory and field is needed. If our understanding of the atmosphere continues to develop and if some of the currently exciting speculations prove to have merit, the tremendous economic potental of even rather modest increases in percipitation in some areas of the country may be realized. More importantly, we should develop our basic understanding rapidly enough to insure that our projects are not rash and ultimately harmful because their long-range effects were not adequately appreciated. For, in the words of Sir Francis Bacon, "We cannot command nature except by obeying her." There are many scientists including members of the Foundation staff of the National Science Board who have become increasingly convinced that the changing character of man's interaction with his environment will constitute the central scientific problem for the next generation or two. The Foundation is vitally concerned with developing and shaping the role it must have in this general problem area in order properly to serve the coming needs of society. The study of the problems of human interaction with the environment requires a broad range of scientific skill, physical sciences, oceanography, meteorology, geophysics, geology, chemistry, social sciences including anthropology, sociology, engineering including transportation, sanitary engineering, systems engineering, biological science including ecology, and so on. The magnitude of environmental problems is growing at an amazing rate as is the number of thoughtful citizens, both scientists and others, who are becoming alarmed at the prospects before us. We in the Foundation intend to utilize our background and assocation with the scientific world, our experience in science education and information to hone the cutting edge of the Nation's attack on these crucial problems. It is our opinion that the Foundation must increase its support of research to undergird activities in the field of weather and climate modification. In addition, other Federal agencies should undertake applied research and development in weather modification related to their approved missions. The Foundation has been pleased to witness the development of the Department of the Interior's program in atmospheric water resources and believes that the continued development of that program in consonance with the spirit of S. 2875 should continue. The Foundation does not feel it appropriate to express an opinion as to whether or not the passage of S. 2875 is necessary to assure adequate development of the Department of Interior's atmospheric water resources program. Thank you for allowing me to appear before you today. I shall be pleased to try to answer your questions. Senator ANDERSON. Will the National Science Foundation welcome the opportunity to obtain this responsibility for weather modification? Dr. JONES. You mean the entire responsibility, Mr. Chairman? Senator ANDERSON. Its present responsibility. Dr. JONES. Well, the Director of the National Science Foundation has indicated that he was not opposed to transferring responsibilities for central coordination of weather modification and such responsibilities related to control. Senator ANDERSON. Senator Jordan. Senator JORDAN. I have no questions. Senator ANDERSON. Thank you very much. Thank you for your patience. The committee will recess until tomorrow morning at 10 o'clock. Mr. CHAMBERLAIN. Thank you for the opportunity of appearing before you. (Whereupon, at 3:50 p.m., the committee recessed to reconvene Tuesday, March 22, 1966, at 10 a.m.) 61-553-66--- 8 WEATHER MODIFICATION TUESDAY, MARCH 22, 1966 U.S. SENATE, SUBCOMMITTEE ON WATER AND POWER RESOURCES OF THE Washington, D.C. The subcommittee met, pursuant to recess, at 10 a.m., in room 3110, New Senate Office Building, Senator Clinton P. Anderson (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding. Present: Senators Clinton P. Anderson, of New Mexico; Frank Church, of Idaho; Frank E. Moss, of Utah; Gordon Allott, of Colorado; Len B. Jordan, of Idaho; and Paul J. Fannin, of Arizona. Also present: Senator George McGovern, of South Dakota. Professional staff present: Jerry T. Verkler, staff director; Stewart French, chief counsel; Roy M. Whitacre, professional staff member; Frederick O. Frederickson, special counsel, and E. Lewis Reid, minority counsel. Senator ANDERSON. Our first witness this morning is Mr. Vincent J. Schaefer, director, Atmospheric Sciences Research Center. Dr. Schaefer, I am glad to welcome you back to the fold after all these years. Dr. SCHAEFER. Thank you very much, Senator. It is a great delight to be here. Senator ANDERSON. I will never forget the trips we had under the administration of Dr. Von Neumann. I very much appreciated them. then and I very much appreciate it now. STATEMENT OF DR. VINCENT J. SCHAEFER, DIRECTOR, ATMOSPHERIC SCIENCES RESEARCH CENTER, STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK, ALBANY, N.Y. Dr. SCHAEFER. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I wish to thank you for the opportunity of appearing before you. In the nearly 20 years that have elapsed since November 13, 1946, when I seeded a supercooled cloud in the sky near Greylock Mountain in western Massachusetts, I have witnessed many fascinating developments in the field of experimental meteorology. The tremendous flare of publicity which followed this activity led some to believe that man had finally achieved a major control over atmospheric processes. Some entrepreneurs took advantage of this opportunity and played on the naivete and gulliability of the uninformed public. Others started the long and often frustrating path of research in a sincere attempt to establish the scientific facts about experimental meteorology. |