Privatizing Weather Forecasting in the U.S.: What a Wild, Wrong, and Reckless Idea

          Continuing my analysis of telecommunications-oriented play book ideas in the Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025, I now consider the plan to “commercialize” the National Weather Service.  See https://static.project2025.org/2025_MandateForLeadership_FULL.pdf#page=707

          Reading between the lines, I see a future when taxpayers continue to underwrite billions of dollars in weather satellites ($19.6 billion estimated cost of launching, and maintaining six next generation satellites; https://spacenews.com/noaa-seeks-funding-increases-for-next-generation-satellite-programs/),  but the NWS cannot in-house convert basic weather data into forecasts, warnings, projections, trend detection, and public outreach.

          Simply put, commercial ventures like The Weather Channel and AccuWeather, would share a monopoly in the commercialization of weather forecasting, leaving the NWS and taxpayers with the burden of supplying and paying for creation of the data.

          Is this a Great Country or What? Commercial ventures can “have their cake and eat it too,” no longer content to provide for profit “products,” augmenting what the NWS offers.

          Who needs the NWS when commercial ventures can offer better products, albeit ones that consumers pay twice: 1) taxes to support the NWS acquisition of weather data; and 2) commercial subscriptions and higher prices for advertiser supported commercial weather services.

          For good measure, maybe Congress should outlaw municipalities from operating available to anyone within earshot, storm siren warnings, a widespread precursor and still much appreciated adjunct to cellphone, radio, and social network alerts. See https://www.weather.gov/dvn/sirenFAQ.

          In my hometown of State College PA, AccuWeather operates over a dozen satellite earth stations to receive and “add value to” weather data.  Most of the NWS satellites operate in high geosynchronous orbit so the “birds” have a large geographical “footprint.”  It costs several hundred million dollars to construct, launch, and manage each of these type satellites, a large premium over smaller, limited purpose low earth orbiting satellites that have become increasingly popular for broadband.

          As one of those far from elite academics providing unsponsored research to find the truth, I resent how sponsored research predominates. Project 2025 cites an AccuWeather sponsored advocacy document, masquerading as “research” to tout the superiority of its commercial products:

Each day, Americans rely on weather forecasts and warnings provided by local radio stations and colleges that are produced not by the NWS, but by private companies such as AccuWeather. Studies have found that the forecasts and warnings provided by the private companies are more reliable than those provided by the NWS.” Project 2025 at p. 675, citing https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/latest-study-of-120-million-forecasts-proves-accuweather-forecasts-are-most-accurate-300986848.html

          I doubt whether AccuWeather would care to showcase its superior weather satellite procurement and management prowess if it had to pony up billions for the privilege.  Better to leave that burden to the taxpayer, something the Project 2025, does not acknowledge.

          Bottom line: commercial ventures want to prevent the NWS from even participating in public outreach, apparently even for mission critical warnings that could prevent or reduce calamity. Their simple logic: everyone has a cellphone, so we will not have a digital divide separating the weather informed and uninformed. Who needs NWS competition with far superior commercial products?

          What a wild and shameless idea on the fast track.