by clicking on the page. A slider will appear, allowing you to adjust your zoom level. Return to the original size by clicking on the page again.
the page around when zoomed in by dragging it.
the zoom using the slider on the top right.
by clicking on the zoomed-in page.
by entering text in the search field and click on "In This Issue" or "All Issues" to search the current issue or the archive of back issues respectively.
by clicking on thumbnails to select pages, and then press the print button.
this publication and page.
displays a table of sections with thumbnails and descriptions.
displays thumbnails of every page in the issue. Click on a page to jump.
allows you to browse through every available issue.
FCW : August 15, 2015
Big Data 16 August 15, 2015 FCW.COM Standards coming Brown said NOAA plans to issue a commercial satellite data policy and standards later this year, though he could not specify when. “I am driving toward this year, very aggres- sively,” Brown said of the forthcoming policy, which “will really signal to the industry [NOAA’s] interest” in harnessing private-sector satellite capabilities for data collection. He also promised that the “living” policy would be amended based on industry feedback. Brown pointed to the 2015 NOAA Satellite Conference, at which hundreds of private-sec- tor leaders engaged with NOAA on data stan- dards, as hard evidence of the agency’s inter- est in commercial data. He also embraced the Weather Research and Forecasting Innovation Act of 2015, which passed the House in May and would require NOAA to implement a data collection pilot program with a private-sector partner by October 2016. But he did not have a firm answer on the profitability of such a venture. Who gets paid what? Brown used the phrase “learn forward” several times to describe the process of working out public/private weather data-collection partnerships. “Let’s see if we can get the technology and the feeds and the architecture right” first, he said, adding that the business arrangements would be a separate discussion. Environment Subcommittee Chairman Jim Briden- stine (R-Okla.) lamented the fragile state of America’s satellite infrastructure and touted the benefits of pri- vate-sector involvement. “This data policy is critically important for creating the markets that actually drive innovation,” he said. He made the comparison to his late-night cravings for cheeseburgers, which the private sector satisfies. “If food was to be declared a global, public good and therefore necessary to be given away for free, that cheese- burger would not have been available to me,” Bridenstine said. “That cheeseburger was available because...the share- holders of [McDonald’s] were interested in making a profit.” The analogy addressed the central question in Brown’s testimony: “What is environmental data? Is it intellectual property, or is it a public good?” “We think it’s a public good,” Brown said, though he added that there could be a hybrid model in which data is treated as a public good while companies preserve some property rights. Could NOAA buy private-sector data and then distribute it freely? “The problem with that, as I understand on the industry side, [is] there’s no busi- ness model that supports that,” Brown said. “That’s sort of where we get stuck.” Worldwide sharing benefits NOAA NOAA does not share its weather data with other nations solely for altruistic rea- sons. “For every byte we put in, we get three bytes back,” Brown said. Under the World Meteorological Orga- nization’s Resolution 40, the U.S is obli- gated to freely share “essential” weather data with the rest of the organization. The other 184 WMO countries also share their data, netting the U.S. that three-to- one return. “We share United States data freely and openly so that we can receive data freely and openly from our international partners,” Brown said, noting that NOAA provides only three of the eight primary global forecasting satellites. Such unrestricted data access is “the foundation of the current billion-dollar weather industry,” said Rep. Suzanne Bonamici (D-Ore.). “The current government-owned, com- mercially operated structure has served us well.” And yet NOAA still spends some $20 million annually to buy weather data that falls outside WMO’s “essential” classification, Brown said. Lightning data, which helps scientists learn more about severe weather events, and ocean color data, which helps with the tracking of algal blooms, are two types of valu- able but arguably non-essential data that NOAA buys, and it does so on a proprietary basis, Brown said. NOAA can dodge WMO sharing requirements because the data informs local and regional, not global, forecast- ing, he added. Bridenstine voiced concerns about the first Geostation- ary Operational Environmental Satellite R-Series, which might be delayed from its planned March 2016 launch date. In addition, the Joint Polar Satellite System-1 is slated for a March 2017 launch but has been plagued by delays and cost overruns. Decrying the unprecedented weather data gap those delays could produce, Bridenstine once again championed the role of industry. “NOAA does in fact already purchase weather data from commercial entities. Why not space-based weather data as well?” he asked. He added that “a competitive, commercial market for weather data could drive innovation, reduce costs and increase the quantity and quality of data.” n “For every byte we put in, we get three bytes back.” Manson Brown, NOAA 0815fcw_015-016.indd 16 7/28/15 9:40 AM
July 30, 2015
August 30, 2015