Be There: The Gerald A. Meehl Symposium

Highlighting Key Sessions at AMS 2025

A symposium at the 105th Annual Meeting of the American Meteorological Society will honor Gerald (Jerry) Meehl, a nationally and internationally recognized leader in climate dynamics, climate change, climate modeling and Earth system predictability, and present cutting-edge science in his areas of expertise. Meehl is currently a Senior Scientist at the NSF National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR), section head of the Climate Change Research Section, and the Principal Investigator/Chief Scientist for the DOE-NCAR Cooperative Agreement To Analyze variabiLity, change and predictabilitY in the earth SysTem (CATALYST) project.

We spoke to Gerald A. Meehl Symposium Co-Chair Aixue Hu, Project Scientist in the Climate and Global Dynamics Lab at NSF NCAR, about the field, Dr. Meehl, and what to expect during the symposium, which takes place Tuesday, 14 January, 2025.

“Jerry is a living, breathing encyclopedia of the history behind the history of climate science.”

–Maria Molina, NSF NCAR/University of Maryland

What can attendees expect from the Symposium?

This symposium will honor Dr. Meehl’s service to the climate research community (including his contributions to the CMIP and IPCC assessment reports); and will highlight the current state of research on climate variability, predictability, and change.

Presentations will discuss topics including extreme events, climate dynamics, marine heat waves, subseasonal to decadal climate prediction and predictability, AI and machine learning in climate research and prediction, and interactions between internal variability and external forcings – along with current modelling efforts and the future directions of model improvements.

Why is this such an important field right now?

The global mean temperature continues to rise, and most of the hottest years on record have appeared in the most recent decade. This change in the mean background climate can result in significant impacts on accurate weather forecasts, and on subseasonal to seasonal to decadal predictions. For example, with a much warmer mean climate, the chance for extreme weather events (heat waves, hurricanes, extreme precipitation) increases. Society benefits from improving our understanding of how this change in mean climate will affect our capability to accurately predict/forecast the weather on shorter timescales, and ENSO and decadal climate modes on longer timescales.  

How would you summarize Jerry Meehl’s impact on the field so far?

Over the years, Jerry has spearheaded several new research directions focused on climate models. For example, his work has greatly advanced our understanding of the global warming slowdown in the early 2000s (the “hiatus”) and explored its predictability. His pioneering 2011 Nature Climate Change paper on this topic was named one of the five most influential papers in the first five years of Nature Climate Change (2016). His work has also been crucial to the study of extreme temperature events, monsoons, and decadal climate variability and predictability.

Jerry chaired the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP) Panel under the World Climate Research Program (WCRP) from 1997 to 2007. He led the formulation of the CMIP1 through CMIP3 projects and continued to serve on the panel as it formulated CMIP5 and 6. CMIP1-3 provided the physical science foundation for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) AR3 and AR4 reports.

A historic workshop held at Scripps in 1994 convened the global coupled modeling community to help formulate CMIP; Meehl is pictured second from left, in the second row from the bottom; also pictured: Ron Stouffer (4th from left), Karl Taylor (5th from left), Ben Santer 6th from left. Photo courtesy of Gerald Meehl.

Dr. Meehl also chaired the WCRP Working Group on Coupled Models (2004-2013) and the National Academy of Sciences/National Research Council Climate Research Committee (2008-2011), among other prominent national and international committees. He was a contributing, coordinating, or lead author for the IPCC AR1-AR5 reports, and a member of the IPCC science team that was awarded the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize.

Photo: Author team for Chapter 10, “Global Climate Projections,” IPCC Fourth Assessment Report (AR4), Christchurch, NZ, 2005; coordinating lead authors Jerry Meehl and Thomas Stocker are center back. Photo courtesy of Jerry Meehl.

The AMS has recognized Jerry’s scientific contributions to, and leadership in, climate research, awarding him the Jule G. Charney Award in 2009 “for outstanding collaborative contributions to modeling climate and its response to anthropogenic and natural forcings” and the Sverdrup Gold Medal in 2023 “for seminal work integrating observations, models, and theory to understand variability and change in the ocean and atmosphere.” He is also a fellow of AMS since 2006, and of AGU since 2014. He has also been recognized by organizations including Reuters and Web of Science as an influential and very highly cited researcher.

Left photo: Jerry Meehl and Warren Washington awarded the AMS Charney Award, in Phoenix, AZ (2009). Right photo: Group photo of participants in the Warren Washington Symposium at AMS, January 2010, convened by Dave Bader and Jerry Meehl; the only time that “legends of climate modeling” Suki Manabe, Larry Gates, Warren Washington, and Jim Hansen attended the same meeting at the same time. From left:  Kirk Bryan, Suki Manabe, Jerry, Greg Jenkins, Larry Gates, Jane Lubchenco, Steve Schneider, Dave Bader, Warren Washington, John Kutzbach, V. Ramanathan, Jim Hansen, Bert Semtner. Photo credits: American Meteorological Society.

Even as a world famous climate scientist, Jerry is very approachable. He makes himself available to young scientists and gives them unselfish guidance and support. When Jerry was leading the CMIP effort and was lead author for the IPCC assessment reports, his communication skills helped move the CMIP effort forward, and he navigated through differences among lead authors smoothly. Jerry is not only a great scientist, but also a great mentor, communicator, and writer. He has worked with numerous graduate students, post-docs, and junior researchers and left significant impacts on their careers. That includes being my own mentor and role model for over 20 years! 

It might be a surprise to many people, especially the early career scientists, that Jerry is also a writer. He has authored and co-authored six books that grew out of his personal interests in World War II, especially in the Pacific theater. His ability to communicate and relate to others shines through no matter what he does!

The Gerald A. Meehl Symposium will be held Tuesday, 14 January, 2025 at the AMS 105th Annual Meeting, in New Orleans, LA, and online. Learn more about the Symposium and view the program.

“Weather in Action”: Training Meteorology Students to Chase Storms

Photo "Walsh Mothership" by Michael Seger shows a rounded storm from a distance at twilight, with a lightning flash in the sky in the foreground. The photo was voted Member's Choice in the 2023 AMS Weather Band Photo Contest.

A Session Spotlight for the 24th Annual AMS Student Conference

This January, the 24th Annual Student Conference will host the first storm chasing training ever held at an AMS meeting! Jennifer Walton of AMS partner organization Girls Who Chase (GWC) and Robin Tanamachi of Purdue University (currently on sabbatical with UCAR COMET/MetEd), will teach Student Conference participants skills and strategies for more safely experiencing “meteorology in action.” We spoke with Jen Walton about what to expect, and what meteorologists and other scientists should know about storm chasing!

What should Student Conference attendees expect from this storm chasing training? Why is this a good venue for such a training?

Given the release of “Twisters” in July 2024, and knowing how many folks were inspired by the release of the original Twister movie in 1996, the conference organizers felt it was fair to expect a significant increase in people storm chasing (and likely also new meteorology students!). Some new chasers are likely to be meteorology undergraduate and graduate students attending the student conference. We want to get ahead of this rush — and encourage future meteorologists to get out into the field and see meteorological processes in person. GWC now has a reputation for offering accessible, entry-level storm chasing education programming via our annual Spring Training event, held in partnership with COMET’s MetEd program, so we were an obvious candidate for the job.

Given the strong interest in storm chasing over the decades and the potential for a spike in new chasers, GWC and AMS can contribute to the development of a more safety- and education-minded population of chasers by creating accessible educational resources and fostering a welcoming, inclusive community. This training is part of that conscious endeavor. 

Learning to storm chase involves the development of several additional, important skill sets that don’t directly translate out of what folks learn from a meteorology degree. As we all know, when it comes to weather, things don’t always work out the way we think they will, and no two storms will behave exactly the same way because of constantly evolving environmental factors.  So even if you have a solid atmospheric science background, it’s helpful to pair an understanding of forecasting with other skills. For example, topics such as translating radar to reality, chase strategy and positioning, safety planning and strategy, and knowing how to prepare for a day in the field are all useful for a budding chaser. Those things definitely take more than a couple of hours to learn about, so this training will be more of a “learn how and where to get started” course, with some clear actionable next steps for those who want to continue their learning journey. And of course, we’ll have some fun stories and videos to share.

Why would atmospheric scientists want to chase storms?

I like to quote Ginger Zee on this one, because she’s a longtime storm chaser who is a big proponent of meteorologists experiencing severe weather firsthand. From her perspective, storm chasing really drives home a deeper understanding of severe weather and the dynamics at play during a severe event. It can also ultimately help meteorologists better communicate with their audience, when relevant, because they have actually experienced some of what they are forecasting firsthand. 

I think there is much to be gained from getting outside for a day or more — seeing weather in action really fills in the gaps when it comes to understanding how various processes take place. For example, storms might look structurally similar on radar, but every storm is completely unique in some way. The only way to fully understand that is through experience. Even if folks have no plans to include field work in their future endeavors, understanding how severe weather can evolve, seeing it with your own eyes, and even perhaps witnessing some of the impacts it can have on people and property can more fully develop a new meteorologist. Some folks have made career decisions, like pairing emergency management or public health with meteorology, based on their personal experiences in the field. You just never know.

How did you get into storm chasing, and what made you want to teach others?

I’ve had a 20-year career in environmental and climate communication, but always assumed chasing wasn’t for me — until one day I decided that was silly because I’ve always been pretty obsessed with severe weather. I finally sent myself on a storm chasing tour in 2018 to check it out. I saw my first tornado on my own shortly after that, 45 minutes from my home in Colorado, and the rest is history. I spent the following several years studying forecasting, learning via making lots of mistakes chasing on my own, and discovering the very real joy of witnessing some truly incredible stuff.

The creation and evolution of GWC is rooted in that journey. Due to my background, I had the wherewithal and tenacity to find the people and resources I needed to learn to chase, but it wasn’t easy, and there was very little training available. My storm chasing tour folks gave me the basics and I continued on my own from there. It seemed like a no brainer to start pushing out resource listings and soon, trainings, via GWC. Our attendance at Spring Training in 2023, our first year, blew me away, and then we nearly doubled that number in 2024. 

I’m excited to continue to expand this type of education into different weather circles, and even more excited to bring it to AMS!

Why is increasing accessibility and diversity in weather and storm chasing so important right now?

There’s clearly interest in learning about chasing and severe weather, and I think a bit of a hunger for learning in safe, welcoming environments. The sciences don’t always seem terribly open to a general enthusiast, yet weather affects literally everyone on the planet. It’s crucial that people understand the basics of how to keep themselves and their loved ones safe, especially as the frequency and intensity of severe weather events continue to increase globally. Now is not the time for people to feel like they aren’t welcome in a learning environment, no matter their gender, ethnicity, background or knowledge level. 

Does GWC offer other resources for people interested in storm chasing safely?

If folks would like to take the next step after the student conference training — or aren’t attending the Student Conference — I certainly encourage them to check out our library of free learning resources we maintain on the Girls Who Chase Education page. And if active training is more someone’s style, definitely check out Spring Training 2025, a one-day, virtual, affordable training event that offers in-depth foundational, operational and accessible information and training material for storm chasers at all levels, and the chance to speak with experts in the field. We record every Spring Training event as well, to create a library of resources people can use to start learning anytime!

Learn more about this training, and about the AMS Student Conference!

Photo at top: Photo “Walsh Mothership,” by Michael Seger, won Member’s Choice in the 2023 AMS Weather Band Photo Contest.

Be There: The Heather Lazrus Symposium

Highlighting Key Sessions at AMS 2025

How can the scientific enterprise be improved by including Indigenous knowledge systems and scientific methodologies? How can we better support Indigenous researchers? How can other researchers cultivate respectful and fruitful relationships with Indigenous communities to improve the actionable, cultural and societal relevance of scientific efforts and environmental adaptation?

Since 2010, sessions and symposia at the AMS Annual Meeting have highlighted the importance of recognizing and respecting Indigenous science and knowledge systems within our geoscience communities. Dr. Heather Lazrus, co-founder of the Rising Voices Center for Indigenous and Earth Sciences, was a key force behind these initiatives. To honor Lazrus, who passed on from cancer in February 2023, the 105th Annual Meeting will host the AMS 2025 Heather Lazrus Symposium, “Convergence Science: Indigenous Weather, Water and Climate Knowledge, Systems, Practices and Communities.”

“The urgent threat posed by our climate crisis necessitates innovative actions. Innovation is an opportunity to look beyond Earth sciences to solutions in other knowledge systems and, in doing so, to support the rising voices of those who have been historically marginalized.” 
– Lazrus et al., 2022

What is Convergence Science?

As Symposium co-host Julie Maldonado and colleagues write in an upcoming paper, convergence science “brings together diverse disciplines, cultures, knowledge systems, and ways of knowing and understanding to solve complex problems that cannot be addressed by a single discipline or knowledge-system alone.” The term “convergence science” is often used in the context of bringing together physical, biological, and social sciences; recognizing Indigenous perspectives further emphasizes the artificial nature of boundaries between sciences and ways of knowing. The Rising Voices, Changing Coasts Hub notes that convergence science asserts “the deep relationality of life, of the planet, of mother earth, of the affirmation that we are all related.”

Honoring a Life of Justice and Leadership

Lazrus, a noted environmental anthropologist, made important strides to strengthen collaborations among Indigenous communities and researchers around climate and environmental change. She co-founded and co-directed the Rising Voices Center for Indigenous and Earth Sciences at the U.S. National Science Foundation’s National Center for Atmospheric Research and was co-principal investigator of the NSF-funded Rising Voices, Changing Coasts: The National Indigenous and Earth Sciences Convergence Hub (RVCC Hub) project.

(Image: Attendees at the 7th Annual Rising Voices Workshop, held in 2019 at NSF NCAR in Boulder, CO. Photo courtesy of the Rising Voices Center.)

Lazrus was a beloved kin in many communities, who navigated complex discussions and relationships with skill to foster respectful and meaningful relationships. Author of more than 100 research articles, book chapters, influential reports, and more, Lazrus was one of the most cited experts in her field. Yet she was also known for her humility and willingness to engage in important work behind the scenes.

As her colleagues Julie Maldonado, Elizabeth Marino, Shannon McNeeley, and Courtney Carothers wrote in their tribute to her for the Society for Applied Anthropology, “Heather … was a mother, partner, friend, scholar, adventurer, social justice advocate, scientist, matchmaker, and intellectual, involved in the creation of many relationships, ideas, and movements …”

“She was a trailblazer among scientists centering culture and equity in the study of the lived experiences of climate change. She was also an early advocate for decolonized pedagogy and research.”

(Image: Lazrus at the 4th Annual Rising Voices Workshop, held in 2016 on Hawai‘i Island. Photo courtesy of the Rising Voices Center.)

“She fought always for what is right. She was funny. She led with her heart. She believed that the world could become a better place. … We believe she is still close to the work she leaves behind, and close to the circle of people and all relations that will carry her legacy forward.”

What to Expect from the Symposium

The Lazrus Symposium will host a Presidential Session with the RVCC’s’ Louisiana Hub, in which local Tribal leaders, elders, and partnering scientists share their stories of weaving together Indigenous and other science knowledge for place-based convergence science and community adaptation. 

The Symposium will also include presentations from early career Indigenous scholars on emerging Indigenous innovations related to weather, water, and climate. For example, sharing ideas focused on Indigenous-led systems change and capacity sharing for community resilience, salt marsh restoration as climate mitigation, convergent research for climate adaptation and supporting subsistence harvests, and biocultural approaches to mitigate fire risk. A luncheon will be held in honor of Lazrus, featuring a special screening of “Everything Has a Spirit” and a conversation with filmmaker Ava Hamilton (Arapaho). In addition, the program includes discussions on how to improve scientific partnerships among federal agencies and Tribal governments and communities, and presentations by Indigenous scientists on fostering intercultural dialogue and respectful engagement.

“Whether you have long been engaged in convergence science or intercultural collaborations or you are learning about these ideas for the first time, this space is for you,” note the session organizers. “We welcome the AMS community into this ongoing conversation to co-create culturally relevant and actionable scientific knowledge and actions that increase climate resilience and support healthy, thriving communities today and for future generations.”

The Heather Lazrus Symposium will be held Monday, 13 January, 2025 at the AMS 105th Annual Meeting, in New Orleans, LA, and online; it will feature invited presentations along with a special luncheon. Learn more about the Symposium and view the program.

Special thanks to the Symposium Organizing Committee: Julie Maldonado (Livelihoods Knowledge Exchange Network); Stephanie Herring (NOAA’s National Centers for Environmental Information); Eileen Shea (Rising Voices); Diamond Tachera (NSF NCAR); Katie Jones (NEON | Battelle); Robbie Hood (Blue Thunderbird LLC); Tim Schneider (NSF NCAR Research Applications Laboratory); Jen Henderson (Texas Tech University); Carlos Martinez (NSF).

What’s the Value of a Weather Forecast?

"Colorado Flakes" by Henry Reges

Highlights from the CoFU2 study: Part 2

By Jeffrey K. Lazo

This is part two of my summary of the Communicating Forecast Uncertainty (CoFU) 2 study, a follow-up (based on a 2022 national survey) to the 2009 CoFU 1 study that examines how the U.S. public gets, perceives, uses, and values weather forecasts. In part one we discussed key findings and delved a bit deeper into who uses forecasts the most, what they use forecasts for, and where they get their forecasts from. Read part 1 here.

In this post, we’ll examine public satisfaction with weather forecasts, what people most want from a forecast, and how much money the general public thinks a forecast is worth.

How satisfied are people with weather forecasts?

As shown below, people are more satisfied with weather forecasts than before. Overall, satisfaction with weather forecasts on average was 4.03 on a 5-point scale (significantly higher than the 3.78 average in 2006). People with higher education, Latinos, those who use city-specific weather forecasts, and those who access forecasts purely out of interest were more satisfied. People who spent more leisure time outside or used forecasts to plan social activities, however, were less satisfied.

Interestingly, however, there has been a slight decrease when it comes to confidence in weather forecasts—specifically short-term (1-day) weather forecasts. Confidence in 3-day and longer forecasts increased between 2006 and 2022. We don’t know exactly why, and are curious to further explore this question. I am particularly interested in examining whether these changes in public perception actually track with differences in forecast performance.

Average Confidence in Forecasts by Time Period and Survey Version 

Notes: The survey question asked, “How much confidence do you have in weather forecasts for the times listed below?” The times were listed as “Less than 1 day from now, “1 day from now,” and so on, out to “7 to 14 days from now.” (CoFU1 n = 1,465; CoFU2 n = 1,092). Source: CoFU2, Figure ES-5.

What weather factors matter most to people?

We asked survey respondents which components of a weather forecast were most important to them. In 2006, people most wanted to know when precipitation was going to occur. In 2022, however, high temperature took the top spot. This reflects an overall preference for precipitation information in 2006 vs. temperature information in 2022. That preference could be related to climate shifts, or it may simply be a reflection on when the surveys took place (November in 2006, May in 2022).

Mean Importance of Forecast Attributes Ranked by Difference between Surveys 

Notes: The survey question asked, “How important is it to you to have the information listed below as part of a weather forecast?” (CoFU1 n = 1,465; CoFU2 n = 1,092). Source: CoFU2, Figure ES-7.

How do people value weather forecasts?

We assigned each respondent a dollar value that they might hypothetically pay in taxes each year to support NWS products and services (including forecasts). We then asked whether NWS services were worth that amount, worth more, or worth less. Using those responses, we calculated the likelihood of saying it was worth that amount for each dollar value, and then calculated the median willingness to pay for weather forecasts as $898.50, with a 95% confidence interval of approximately $700-$1,300 per household per year as shown below.

Fitted Demand Curve for Current Weather Forecast Information

Notes: The survey question asked “Do you feel that the services you receive from the activities of the NWS are worth more than, exactly, or less than $N a year to your household?” (CoFU2 data only n = 1,094). Source: CoFU2, Figure ES-10.

On average, people who were older, who were employed full time or were homemakers, who were white, who spent more recreational time outside, who used forecasts for social activities or just out of interest, and who highly valued knowing the daily high temperature were all less willing to pay for NWS forecasts. Those who spent more working time outside, used forecasts more frequently, placed more importance on NWS information, had more personal weather impacts, considered wind and cloud information more important, and who had greater total weather salience (a measure of attunement to and awareness of weather) were all more willing to pay for current forecasts. Related to the Cultural Theory of Risk, people who were identified as “individualists,” based on cultural risk theory, were significantly less likely to be willing to pay for forecasts. Individualists may perceive themselves to be less at risk from weather events.

If we can take the $898.50 median value as the average household willingness to pay, we can then aggregate this across the entire US population of about 120 million households. Accounting for the portion who say they don’t use forecasts, we calculate a total value to the US of about $102.1 billion for current weather forecast information. 

Like any large-scale study of human beings, this analysis has tried to be as representative and accurate as possible—and yet almost certainly has potential gaps. Hopefully CoFU2 provides a useful picture of weather forecasts and the U.S. public, but its results should be replicated and further studied if they are to be used to inform any real-world decisions. Access to weather information can be a life-and-death matter, and no decision about that should be taken lightly. Read the full study here.

Photo at top: “Colorado Flakes,” by Henry Reges, was a finalist in the 2022 AMS Weather Band Photo Contest.

How Does the U.S. Public Get its Weather Forecasts?

Photo, 'Striking Sunset'

Highlights from the CoFU2 Study: Part 1

By Jeffrey K. Lazo, PhD

In 2006, I, my National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) colleagues Julie Demuth and Rebecca Morss, and Alan Stewart of The University of Georgia began designing and implementing a national study of weather forecast users. We wanted to understand how people are getting their forecasts, how they’re using them, and how much they’re worth to people. 15 years after that study was published, I have released the follow-up study: Communicating Forecast Uncertainty (CoFU) 2. Using essentially the identical 2022 survey, I replicate and extend the findings from the first survey for another look at the public’s relationship with weather forecasts. We believe that our 2022 survey reached a more representative proportion of the U.S. population, including younger adults and certain racial groups, compared with the survey in 2006. 

In this post–part one of two–I delve into a few of the key takeaways.

The big picture

This study estimates that members of the U.S. public access weather forecasts roughly 317 billion times per year—a 7.26% increase since 2006, driven largely by the increase in U.S. population. There was also a significant increase, however, in the number of survey respondents who said they never used weather forecasts. If this result is real, and not just an unusual result of the repeated survey implementation, it would be very important to understand why. Overall, people rated their satisfaction with weather forecasts high, but confidence in short-term (1-day) forecasts has decreased, while people were more confident in longer-term forecasts. 

To get their forecasts, people continue to shift toward sources like web pages and cell phones, from which they specifically seek out weather information, rather than more “passive” sources such as TV and public/private radio broadcasts. 

The estimated monetary value of forecasts to the U.S. public is $102.1 billion (which comes out to about 32 cents per forecast use). However, our approach to obtaining this value was limited, and we feel it should be used only as an estimate of the overall strength of people’s preferences for the information pending more rigorous studies.

Who’s using weather forecasts, and what for?

People with the following characteristics were more likely to say they used weather forecasts: Higher income, female, more highly educated, White, Black, Asian, Native, and those who spend leisure time outdoors.

The percentage of the surveyed population who said they never used weather forecasts increased from 3.62% in 2006 to 9.15% in 2022, a statistically significant difference. This was a basic yes/no question, so we don’t have good information about what people mean when they say they don’t use weather forecasts at all. It’s also possible that our latest survey did a better job of reaching people who don’t use weather forecasts. As noted above, if there has been a real decline in the number of people using forecasts this should be examined in more detail to determine why. 

According to the survey, the most common reason people checked a forecast was simply to know what the weather would be like (they may be simply monitoring the weather in case their plans change or the weather shifts dramatically). The next most common uses were for weekend activities, getting dressed, social activities, and travel. Job-related activities and commuting ranked last.

How and where are people getting their forecasts?

As shown in the figure below, usage of weather forecast sources such as TV, commercial and public radio, and newspapers has decreased since 2006. Notably, these are sources which tend to be more traditional and more “passive,” in that you may come across weather information without specifically looking for a forecast. Meanwhile, the use of more “modern” sources like NWS web pages, phones, and other electronic devices increased, along with the use of social connections and NOAA Weather Radio to find out about weather information. These days, people who use weather forecasts appear to be more likely to actively seek out this information.

Frequency of Use by Source by Survey Version 
Notes: The survey question asked, “How often do you get weather forecasts from the sources listed below?” Response options ranged from “Rarely or never” to “Two or more times a day,” and were conservatively recoded into times per month. (CoFU1 n = 1,465; CoFU2 n = 1,092). Source: CoFU2, Figure ES-2.

The number of times that the average person accessed weather information each month slightly increased between 2006 (115.4) and 2022 (117.8), but the difference was not statistically significant. Time of forecast access has shifted slightly earlier in the day on average, which we suspect may be related to the shift away from TV forecasts, or possibly an increase in people who work from home since the onset of the COVID pandemic.

Tune in for part 2 of this summary to learn more about what people are looking for from weather forecasts, and how we arrived at an economic value for those forecasts. Or, you can read the full study here.

Photo at top: “Striking Sunset,” by Liz Kemp, was an entry in the 2023 AMS Weather Band Photo Contest.

Community Modeling and the Future of Numerical Weather Prediction

A 2024 AMS Summer Community Meeting highlight

The AMS Weather Enterprise Study will provide a comprehensive picture of the shifting landscape of weather-related fields to inform our joint future. At the 2024 Summer Community Meeting, working groups discussed what they’d found about key issues facing the enterprise.

Here are a few takeaways from the Community Modeling working group, as reported by Gretchen Mullendore of the NSF National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR). Community modeling employs Earth system model software developed by public-academic partnerships. Community models have open-source components and are freely available for use by anyone with the computing power to run them–for example researchers, students, and private companies.

Photo: Gretchen Mullendore

How has the community modeling landscape changed in recent years, and where are we now?

First, artificial intelligence and machine learning (AI/ML) have become huge players in numerical weather prediction (NWP) model development. Second, a cultural change in weather research and forecasting is taking place; we’re beginning to collaborate much more closely across agencies and industries than we used to, and many people are invested in deepening those collaborations.

What were the main themes that came out of your working group’s discussions?

The NWP community is collaborating more than ever before. However, the community remains spread among many institutions, with each research group working on small pieces of the overall weather prediction challenge. Having many research groups can be a strength in terms of encouraging innovation, but it is a weakness if research isn’t coordinated effectively to fully realize collective benefits. Limited funding and resourcing is an additional barrier to community model development. As a community, we need to continue to prioritize modularity and interoperability across NWP systems and work towards more effective shared governance.

Another major theme is the role of the private sector in NWP. Big tech companies are increasingly getting into NWP and there is a concern that public forecasting efforts are not able to keep pace. The private sector brings agility and innovation to the field, and working to leverage unique contributions across public, academic, and private research entities is valuable. However, if the growing role of the private sector in NWP leads to more observations, simulations, and software being behind proprietary walls, there is risk to accessibility and collaboration.

The NWP community is also facing challenges in workforce development. Universities are teaching people the right skills to work in data assimilation and analytics, but many of those people are being scooped up by private sector companies in other fields offering salaries that employers in the weather industry cannot compete with. We need to better communicate the value of our missions and our work to attract and retain talented early career professionals.

What preliminary recommendations or future directions have you discussed?

We can and should continue to build on community efforts to coordinate across public, academic, and private developers. This coordination should include planning for the appropriate use of AI/ML tools in NWP research and applications. We can also build on efforts to leverage social science research to prioritize our limited resources, e.g., by learning what type of forecasting improvements will most benefit stakeholders. Finally, we need to recognize the importance of the legislature in resourcing model development. It’s important to communicate our successes and the value of a thriving NWP community. In summary, we should strategize to develop intentional communication among ourselves, across disciplines, and most importantly, with legislatures and the public.

What did you hear from the community at the Summer Community Meeting?

My pick for the most important question asked at the SCM is, “What does success look like in NWP development?” The goal that motivates us all in the NWP community is for no more deaths to occur as a result of weather hazards. In order to achieve breakthroughs in prediction that stand to move us closer to that goal, we need to invest in innovation, which requires risk. However, much of the work in NWP development is funded by federal agencies, which tend to be risk-averse. More broadly, the systems in which our scientists work can be an impediment to innovation. For example, the pressure to publish often incentivizes incremental progress over new ideas. Collectively, as an NWP community, we need to build systems that allow researchers to take risks without fear of failure or negative consequences.

What are the main challenges, conflicts, or points of discussion identified by the group (or at the SCM)?

AI/ML could possibly improve the skill and speed of all parts of the NWP system. That said, the challenges are also great. Challenges include a lack of AI/ML expertise in NWP community leadership; a need to invest in AI/ML without additional resources; and a need to keep up with the latest AI/ML research, which is moving incredibly rapidly. The lack of clear AI/ML plans from U.S. institutional leaders in NWP led some to ask at the SCM if leaders were skewed against it. My perception is instead that the community is feeling overwhelmed by these challenges. We can overcome these challenges through innovation and collaboration, leveraging our respective expertise and investments to more efficiently take advantage of the great opportunity that is AI/ML in NWP.

Want to join a Weather Enterprise Study working group? Email [email protected].

About the Weather Enterprise Study

The AMS Policy Program, working closely with the volunteer leadership of the Commission on the Weather, Water, and Climate Enterprise, is conducting a two-year effort (2023-2025) to assess how well the weather enterprise is performing, and to potentially develop new recommendations for how it might serve the public even better. Learn more here, give us your input via Google Forms, or get involved by contacting [email protected].  

About the AMS Summer Community Meeting

The AMS Summer Community Meeting (SCM) is a special time for professionals from academia, industry, government, and NGOs to come together to discuss broader strategic priorities, identify challenges to be addressed and opportunities to collaborate, and share points of view on pressing topics. The SCM provides a unique, informal setting for constructive deliberation of current issues and development of a shared vision for the future. The 2024 Summer Community Meeting took place August 5-6 in Washington, DC, and focused special attention on the Weather Enterprise, with opportunities for the entire community to learn about, discuss, debate, and extend some of the preliminary findings coming from the AMS Weather Enterprise Study.

An Epic Odyssey: Celebrating Warren Washington (1936–2024)

By Anjuli S. Bamzai, AMS President

Dr. Warren Washington passed away last month. The American Meteorological Society was lucky to benefit from a career’s worth of attention from this exceptional individual — a trailblazer in climate modeling, NCAR Distinguished Scholar, advisor to five U.S. presidents, National Science Board chair, and longtime leader of the AMS community. He was among the first to develop and use the pioneering atmospheric general circulation models that underlie our current understanding of climate change, and his research contributed to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Fourth Assessment Report that received the Nobel Peace Prize in 2007.

Warren joined AMS as an undergraduate student and was actively engaged with the Society his entire career. He served as our AMS President in 1994, our 75th anniversary year. He played a key role in advancing initiatives to enhance diversity in the field, including as a scholarship donor and co-founder of the Board on Women and Minorities. He was named an Honorary Member, and received several prestigious AMS awards. He was a mentor, beloved colleague, and friend to many of us, myself included.

Elucidating the Future Climate

Warren was born in Portland, Oregon. His parents placed a high value on education despite the hostility his mother faced as a nurse when studying at the University of Oregon and the struggles his Talladega College-educated father faced during the Great Depression. Warren earned his undergraduate degree in physics and his master’s degree in meteorology at Oregon State University. He went on to become the second ever African American to earn a doctorate in the atmospheric sciences, which he received from Penn State University in 1964.

<<The cover of Dr. Warren Washington’s autobiography shows a 1930 panoramic photograph (in three parts) of the Portland, Oregon Bethel African Methodist Episcopal Church and its congregation, which represented about 5% of Oregon’s Black population at the time. Warren’s maternal grandfather, Wirt Morton Sr., is fifth from the right in the bottom segment; Warren’s mother, Dorothy Morton, is in the top segment (to the left of the church door and immediately to the left of the man holding a hat in his hand).

In 1963, Warren joined the NSF National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) as a research scientist. He would remain connected with NCAR for over six decades. He was a Distinguished Scholar there at the time of his passing.

In the 1960s, he worked with his colleague Dr. Akira Kasahara to develop one of the first computer models of the atmosphere. His team at NCAR used those models to enhance our understanding of the role of natural processes as well as human activities in the coupled Earth system — over time incorporating oceans, sea ice, surface hydrology, and more into their simulations. This research would go on to inform innumerable contributions in climate science, including the IPCC’s Nobel Peace Prize-winning work.

Dr. Warren Washington with colleagues. Photo at left: Warren Washington and Akira Kasahara, courtesy of NSF NCAR Archives (original work published 1975). Center photo: Warren and Mary Washington with Anjuli Bamzai. Photo at right: NCAR Climate Change Research Section, 2005. Left to right: Warren Washington, Jerry Meehl, Haiyan Teng, Gary Strand, Stephanie Shearer, Dave Lawrence, Vince Wayland, Julie Arblaster, Reto Knutti, Aixue Hu, and Lawrence Buja. Photo courtesy of Jerry Meehl, NSF NCAR.

In 1986, Warren co-authored the book, An Introduction to Three-Dimensional Climate Modeling, with Claire Parkinson. It provided an introduction to the development of three-dimensional climate models and their applications for simulating aspects of the current climate system, from ENSO to the effects of increasing greenhouse gas concentrations on future climate.

I met Warren on my first visit to NCAR back in the 1990s, and then interacted more closely with him when I was program manager of the climate modeling program at the U.S. Department of Energy and he was serving on the DOE Biological and Environmental Research Advisory Committee (BERAC). We also worked closely on an  international workshop, “Challenges in Climate Change Science and the Role of Computing at the Extreme Scale,” which Warren chaired in 2008. In looking back at the workshop’s themes — which focused on computational issues associated with model development, simulations and assessment, decadal predictability, natural variability and prediction — I am struck by what a visionary Warren was to identify several decades ago some of the vexing issues in climate science that we are still addressing today!

A Decorated Life

During the span of his illustrious career, Warren was on numerous federal advisory committees and commissions. He served on the National Science Board (1994–2006); initially as a member and then as the Chair starting in 2002. In 2002, he was elected to the National Academy of Engineering “for pioneering the development of coupled climate models, their use on parallel supercomputing architectures, and their interpretation.” In 2003, he was elected to the American Philosophical Society.

In 1999, Warren received the Charles Anderson Award from the AMS for “pioneering efforts as a mentor and passionate supporter of individuals, educational programs, and outreach initiatives designed to foster a diverse population of atmospheric scientists. Dr. Charles E. Anderson (1919-1994) was a former Tuskegee Airman and the first African American to receive a PhD in meteorology.

<< Dr. Warren Washington receiving the Charles E. Anderson award in 1999, from AMS President George Lawrence Frederick Jr. Photo courtesy of AMS archives.

In 2006, Warren became an Honorary Member of the AMS. In his acceptance speech, for which he received a standing ovation, he advised early career scientists to find personal growth and leadership by taking part in the broader aspects of their field. He also stated that “Scientists should be free to tell the public, media, and policy makers the results of their research. Of course, there is always the need to make sure not to confuse the public, so individual responsibility is important.” He ended his speech by pointing out that scientific debate should be settled at scientific society meetings.

At the following AMS Annual Meeting, he received the Charles Franklin Brooks Award for Outstanding Service to the Society, and a couple of years later, he shared the 2009 AMS Jule G. Charney Medal with his longtime colleague and collaborator Jerry Meehl.

Warren and Jerry Meehl with Marla Meehl and Mary Washington at the 89th AMS Annual Meeting, held January 2009 in Phoenix, AZ. Photo courtesy of Jerry Meehl, NCAR.

Warren Washington with President Barack Obama

In 2010, Warren was also one of the ten eminent researchers to be awarded the National Medal of Science by President Barack Obama, “for his development and use of global climate models to understand climate and explain the role of human activities and natural processes in the Earth’s climate system and for his work to support a diverse science and engineering workforce.” 

<< Warren Washington receives the National Medal of Science from President Barack Obama. Copyright Charles M. Vest (2010), used with permission.

Also in 2010, a symposium was held in Warren’s honor at the AMS Annual Meeting in Atlanta, Georgia. It was attended by many of the legends of climate modeling!

Attendees at Warren Washington symposium
Mary (left) and Warren (right) Washington at Penn State outside the Warren M. Washington building

Left: Group photo at symposium honoring Warren Washington at the 90th AMS Annual Meeting, held January 2010 in Atlanta, Georgia. From left: Kirk Bryan, Syukuro Manabe, Gerald Meehl, Greg Jenkins, Larry Gates, Jane Lubchenco, Steve Schneider, Dave Bader, Warren Washington, John Kutzbach, V. Ramanathan, Jim Hansen, and Bert Semtner. Photo copyright University Corporation for Atmospheric Research (2010). Right: Mary and Warren Washington at the newly named Warren M. Washington building at Penn State University’s Innovation Park. Photo credit: Patrick Mansell/Penn State (Creative Commons license).

Warren was a Distinguished Alumnus of Penn State and in 2019, Penn State named a building in his honor at its campus Innovation Park site.

A Legacy of Empowerment

Warren was instrumental in establishing AMS’s Board on Women and Minorities, now known as AMS BRAID. He and his wife, Mary, also established an AMS undergraduate scholarship to provide support to underrepresented students. Through their generosity, several who otherwise might not have attended the AMS Annual Meeting have been able to do so.

In early 2020, the AMS set up The Warren Washington Research and Leadership Medal to be awarded to individuals recognized for the combination of highly significant research and distinguished scientific leadership in the atmospheric and related sciences.

Warren was a pioneer and true giant in our community. Those of us who were fortunate to interact with him benefited from his sage counsel, vision, and sharp intellect. No question was mundane enough that it didn’t get a deliberate, candid yet considerate response from him. He helped so many realize their full potential to excel. What a great scientist, and a great humanist! His legacy lives on through those he supported, mentored, and inspired.

Dr. Warren Washington was the epitome of a true leader.

Photo at top: Warren Washington with the late Fuqing Zhang (back to camera) and Ruby Leung. Past-President Jenni Evans is in the background on the left. Taken at the 2019 opening of the Warren M. Washington building at Penn State. Photo credit: David Kubarek/Penn State (Creative Commons license).

Native American Heritage Month Spotlight: Robbie Hood

Robbie Hood

November is National Native American Heritage Month. In this post, we spotlight the exceptional career of one of our Native American community members: Robbie Hood.

Hood is an atmospheric scientist with over 30 years of experience at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. She is a member of the Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma.

Can you tell us a few highlights of your current or most recent work?

I am a Cherokee meteorologist who worked with NASA and NOAA for a combined total of 30 years. Now in retirement, I am collaborating with NCAR personnel to explore how low-cost 3-D printed weather stations could be used by Indigenous communities for student training and tribal decision-making. I have also been collaborating with the Rising Voices Center for Indigenous and Earth Sciences to plan the program for the 2025 AMS Heather Lazrus Symposium to be held during the 105th AMS Annual Meeting in New Orleans. In this symposium, I will be moderating a panel discussion focused on cultivating tribal and community partnerships within the weather, water, and climate enterprise.

What was an important moment in your early career?

I started my meteorological career as scientific programmer, but I was given an opportunity to step out of my comfort zone at NASA. I became the project scientist for a new passive microwave aircraft instrument that could observe precipitation within thunderstorms and hurricanes. This move gave me the opportunity to work with and, eventually, lead teams of renowned scientists, engineers, and pilots during large international weather field experiments that were conducted in places like Australia, Brazil, Costa Rica, Cape Verde, and the Marshall Islands. Along the way, I got to fly through four different hurricanes, all because I initially stepped out of my comfort zone.

What is something you’re proud of professionally?

My experience leading weather field experiments led me to become the manager of a NOAA program to test the potential benefit of drones and remotely piloted aircraft for operational application. In this role, I was able to organize and fund a multi-million-dollar field experiment to test, for the very first time, the capabilities of a high-altitude Global Hawk remotely piloted aircraft that was controlled from a central command center in Virginia to fly over and observe the characteristics of hurricanes and tropical storms in the Atlantic Ocean and Gulf of Mexico. During these missions, relevant data were successfully sent in near-real time to meteorologists at the National Hurricane Center to assist in their forecasts. Later research studying the impact of Global Hawk data assimilated into weather prediction models demonstrated positive results.

Are there ways in which your Native heritage has influenced or enriched your career?

I credit my Cherokee mother for teaching me to listen closely to how people tell their stories and pay attention to their feelings and expressions as they talk. She thought this would help me better understand who they are and how things looked from their point of view. These skills have helped me build good working relationships and strong collaborations throughout my career.

What’s the Future of Weather Decision-Making?

A 2024 AMS Summer Community Meeting highlight

Matt Corey

The AMS Summer Community Meeting drew exceptional attendance and engagement this year as people across sectors helped inform an upcoming report on the Weather Enterprise. The AMS Weather Enterprise Study will provide a comprehensive picture of the shifting landscape of weather-related fields to inform our joint future. At the 2024 SCM, working groups discussed what they’d found about key issues facing the enterprise, and asked for feedback from the community.

Here are a few takeaways from the Decision Support Services working group, as reported by Matt Corey (pictured at left) of Microsoft Weather. Decision support services (DSS) help stakeholders make weather-related decisions that are informed by the best available knowledge across fields. They are crucial for emergency managers and many other decision makers, as well as members of the public.

How has the decision support landscape shifted in the last decade or so?

Stakeholders for DSS range from an emergency manager making critical decisions about an entire community to an everyday citizen making a decision for themselves or their family. For decision support services, the last two decades have seen an abundance of technology changes which have allowed stakeholders easier access to information. However, this can be both a benefit and a challenge, as misinformation has also become more readily available.

What were the main themes that came out of your working group’s discussions?

The themes that emerged for us included:

  • The different sectors of the Weather Enterprise have become coupled, with less well-defined boundaries when it comes to providing decision support.
  • New players are entering the enterprise, with growing AI and novel ideas.
  • Developing and maintaining the necessary workforce is a concern.
  • There are increased opportunities for translating forecasts into easily understood language in order to support decisions.
  • There is a need for increased funding for quality observational datasets for many applications, especially in AI.
  • In a complex, misinformation-rich environment, there is still room for all sectors to tailor communications to stakeholders, but there is also concern about maintaining consistency in order to maintain trust.
  • Embracing user centric design to understand stakeholder concerns, technical levels, and understanding is important, including the use of probabilistic information.  Example:  “There is an 80% chance the flooding will happen this afternoon.”

What are the main challenges you have identified?

In our group, the discussion continues to be about who should be providing decision support services. As the NWS gets more involved in DSS, one concern is for increased friction from some private sector entities. Another key point is that DSS is not limited to a specific stakeholder type. DSS is important to all citizens who need to make decisions involving weather every day, thus there is a shared dimension and need for responsible and clear messaging to all stakeholders (including the tactical use of probabilistic information). 

A final recurring theme is around the workforce itself. Forecasters need to be taught communication skills, and social science is critical in helping to understand the needs and problems to be solved for the end users. With the focus shifting to newer tools including AI-infused capabilities, there is a concern that the new workforce will lose the necessary skills critical in conveying adequate decision support services.

What preliminary/tentative recommendations, solutions, or future directions have you discussed?

Some of the recommendations we’re working with right now focus on:

  • Integration of weather, water, and climate information with socioeconomic and biosphere information for earth system forecasts.
  • Cross-sector support of ecological forecasts and environmental early warning systems (for example, warnings of fishing industry impacts due to warmer water) to benefit society and facilitate impact-based action.
  • Improved communication about weather impacts, especially in a changing climate, using common terms and learnings based on stakeholder’s decision needs.
  • Embracing AI as a way to increase the velocity of forecasts, integrate probabilistic information into forecasts, and increase efficiency for both short-term services like nowcasting and long-term climate solutions for all.
  • Helping meteorologists to become the communicators that they should be. Leveraging AI solutions and tools to help make them more efficient at helping stakeholders with their decisions.
  • Expanding opportunities for smaller businesses/individuals to obtain specialized DSS.
  • Increased public awareness of changing weather patterns stimulating the need for better accuracy, earlier warnings, and long-range projections.
  • The need to smartly integrate probabilistic information to help stakeholders better understand forecasts and limitations.

Want to join a Weather Enterprise Study working group? Email [email protected].

About the Weather Enterprise Study

The AMS Policy Program, working closely with the volunteer leadership of the Commission on the Weather, Water, and Climate Enterprise, is conducting a two-year effort (2023-2025) to assess how well the weather enterprise is performing, and to potentially develop new recommendations for how it might serve the public even better. Learn more here, give us your input via Google Forms, or get involved by contacting [email protected].  

About the AMS Summer Community Meeting

The AMS Summer Community Meeting (SCM) is a special time for professionals from academia, industry, government, and NGOs to come together to discuss broader strategic priorities, identify challenges to be addressed and opportunities to collaborate, and share points of view on pressing topics. The SCM provides a unique, informal setting for constructive deliberation of current issues and development of a shared vision for the future. The 2024 Summer Community Meeting took place August 5-6 in Washington, DC, and focused special attention on the Weather Enterprise, with opportunities for the entire community to learn about, discuss, debate, and extend some of the preliminary findings coming from the AMS Weather Enterprise Study.

Renewable Energy Needs the Weather Enterprise: A call to action

Solar panels with clouds in the background. Photo: Pixabay from Pexels

By Justin Sharp, EPRI

Note: This is a guest blog post; it represents the views of the author alone and not the American Meteorological Society.

Justin Sharp

The “Transition to Carbon-Free Energy Generation” Presidential Session at the AMS 104th Annual Meeting discussed the status of–and barriers to–the U.S. transition to renewable energy. During that panel, I and several other speakers discussed how the weather enterprise will be key to this effort. Meteorological expertise is a keystone of power systems with large shares of renewable energy.

Weather Drives a Vastly More Complex Electric System 

Existing electric systems are some of the largest and most complex machines humankind has ever built, with every component linked and synchronized. Electricity consumption is increasing rapidly as sectors currently powered by fossil fuels switch to electric power, and demands from data centers, AI, and cypto-mining escalate. Many of these new loads, such as electric vehicles and indoor heating/cooling/ventilation systems, are affected by weather, especially temperature. At the same time, extreme weather events continue to cause infrastructure outages, a trend likely to increase with climate change.

Amping up solar and wind power means electricity generation is affected by additional weather variables: wind speed, clouds, and aerosols. Thus, weather-dependent generators, sited across broad geographic areas, produce complex interactions that can have large impacts that were never previously imagined.

Planning and operating such an electric system, day and night, through heat and cold, sun and cloud, wind and calm, with increasing amounts of weather dependent load, using large numbers of wind and solar generators and energy-limited storage devices, is an unprecedented challenge for the sector. 

Better Data for Better Grids

Our ability to forecast renewable energy generation is improving rapidly, and better weather forecasts can reduce uncertainty in our estimates of future generation, easing the integration of renewable energy into grid operations. However, by themselves, even perfect forecasts cannot solve the problem of variability and shortfalls in renewable energy generation across the year. Better historical weather data (and best practices for their use) are vital to plan and build electric systems that can most effectively meet our highly variable energy demand, using diverse power sources and energy storage to ensure reliability across environmental and grid conditions.

Right now, the power sector is blind to a lot of key challenges, with power system planners often relying on weather data that is less certain and more limited than they believe it is. For example, gridded data from numerical weather prediction models are often utilized in planning tools without validation or uncertainty quantification and as if they have observational quality. This can result in important risks being missed. For instance, cold days lead to high electric demand and an increasing risk of infrastructure outages. Such critical days often occur in conjunction with strong inversions; frequently the combination of model resolution and/or parameterizations does not properly handle these inversions, resulting in over-estimates of wind and temperature, and under-estimates in clouds and fog. Issues like these could result in under- or over-building infrastructure, potentially leading to reliability concerns or incurring unnecessary costs.

Building a Weather-Data Infrastructure

Just as meteorologists employ models to diagnose and forecast atmospheric phenomena, electric system specialists utilize power system models to optimally plan and operate the grid. As electric grids evolve to include large amounts of renewable generation and energy storage, ensuring reliable, affordable electric power requires, a) improvement of these models to fully consider the uncertainty inherent in the weather and b) best-in-class, fit-for-purpose weather and climate information to inform the models.

Increasingly detailed records of past weather conditions for large regions and long time histories are needed — yet they typically do not exist as observations and thus must be synthesized. Comprehensive validation of such model data is also essential, along with user education and data curation to ensure that stakeholders appropriately apply weather intelligence in their downstream analyses. 

Assessing, validating, and hopefully bias-correcting weather model estimates requires large quantities of ground-truth weather data. The rapid buildout of wind and solar facilities is producing such a data network, but unfortunately, there is often significant resistance from owners to sharing this data. There’s hope though; the Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT) now mandates that all renewable generators provide their power and meteorological data to the public. We need to see similar approaches elsewhere, as soon as possible. 

You can learn more about all these issues in an ESIG report I co-authored. In summary, two incredibly complex fields — the electrical grid and atmospheric sciences — are becoming increasingly intertwined. There is a need to work together across sectors to define the requirements for optimal meteorological support for ongoing planning and operation of evolving power grids, and to develop an operational framework for producing, disseminating, and ensuring appropriate use of  this intelligence. EPRI and other organizations are working to convene stakeholders to respond to this urgent need and I encourage interested parties (including data users, data producers, and observational data owners) to contact me at EPRI. Only by working together across sectors can we create the reliable and affordable carbon-free grids needed to power the economy while ensuring a livable future for our planet. 

Header photo: Pixabay from Pexels 

Further Reading