Federal Climate Service Gets Hearing in House

House Republicans accused the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) of opening a propaganda office as they sharply questioned its proposal to redirect funds to create a new Climate Service.

“This just seems like a politically motivated advocacy office,” said Rep. Paul Broun (R-GA).

NOAA Administrator Jane Lubchenco appeared before the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology on Wednesday as the agency seeks Congressional approval of its fiscal year 2012 budget, which reallocates money to support the agency’s biggest reorganization since it was created in 1970.

“Our proposed reorganization has nothing to do with cap and trade,” she said. “It is not regulatory. It is not advocacy. Our mission is to provide scientific information.”

Announced last year, NOAA’s Climate Service would bring the agency’s existing climate capabilities under a single entity to more efficiently and effectively respond to demands for climate services, which include long-term forecasting of floods and droughts. It would include the Climate Prediction Center, two science labs, and three data centers from the National Environmental Satellite, Data and Information Service.

The reorganization would help put an end to today’s bureaucratic inefficiencies and missed opportunities in providing data demanded by the public and industry that save lives and property, Lubchenco said. Direct requests for climate information are increasing, she said. Firefighters use the information to prepare for wildfires. Farmers use the data to plant crops. Local communities and emergency managers are looking for sea level data.

The home-building industry alone, she said, saves $300 million a year in construction costs by using information on the depths of frosts and freezes from one of the agency’s climate tools.

And, she said, the climate services industry is ready to take off, much as private companies have sprung up to add value to data from the National Weather Service.

“We believe there is a huge potential to grow a private sector enterprise around climate services,” she said.

Several House Republicans asked why the agency cannot achieve its goals within its existing structure, and they questioned the intent of the reorganization. Rep. Sandy Adams (R-FL)., asked whether NOAA’s intent is to “advocate a specific model of climate change.”

“Our hesitation is that the Climate Service could become a little propaganda source,” said Rep. Andy Harris (R-MD).

Democrat John Sarbanes (D-MD), defended the agency’s science and praised it for trying to become more efficient and responsive to the public. “I hope we can move forward and create this opportunity,” he said.