plant lover, cookie monster, shoe fiend
20801 stories
·
19 followers

I spent years fighting wildfires. Now, I have PTSD

1 Share
Flames are seen on the ground in a forest during the 2023 Scotch Creek wildfires in B.C.
Photo: Mike Graeme / The Narwhal

Editor’s note: After The Narwhal published a piece about Alberta wildland firefighters forming a peer-support network, we received an email from Matthew Brackenreed. “I’ve been meaning to send this out for a while now — the recent article gave me the courage,” Matthew wrote. Below is what he shared with us.

I spent nearly two decades serving as an Alberta wildland firefighter, responding to some of the most challenging and dangerous situations our province faces.

I am writing because I believe there is an important conversation that needs to happen about occupational post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), cumulative trauma and the realities many firefighters and first responders face after their careers are affected by psychological injuries.

For years, I did what many firefighters do. I showed up for work, responded to emergencies and pushed through difficult experiences without fully understanding the impact they were having on me. Like many in emergency services, I believed I could handle it. Looking back, I now realize that the effects of repeated exposure to trauma were building for years.

Yet despite responding to emergencies and protecting communities from wildfire, provincial wildland firefighters do not receive all of the same legal recognition and presumptive protections afforded to some other first responders in Alberta. It is a distinction I never expected would become so important to me until I became injured myself.

While wildland firefighters can still have occupational psychological injury claims accepted, we do not fall under the same statutory definition of “first responder” used to provide certain presumptive workers’ compensation protections to municipal firefighters, police officers and paramedics. For someone already struggling with the effects of a psychological injury, that distinction can add another layer of difficulty to an already challenging process.

Today, I live with severe PTSD resulting from prolonged exposure to traumatic events throughout my career fighting fires.

PTSD is often associated with a single catastrophic event, but that is not always how it develops. For many firefighters and first responders, trauma can accumulate over years of service. The effects may remain hidden for a long time before eventually becoming overwhelming.

The injury is often invisible to others.

People may see someone who looks physically healthy while not realizing they are struggling with anxiety, panic, nightmares, hypervigilance, memory difficulties, emotional exhaustion and significant disruptions to daily life. Relationships, careers, finances and personal identity can all be affected.

One of the challenges I have encountered is that many systems were originally designed around physical injuries or isolated incidents. Occupational PTSD, especially when caused by years of cumulative exposure, does not always fit neatly into those models.

Wildland firefigther Matthew Brackenreed smiles and gives a thumbs up on the top of a hill damaged by fire.
Matthew Brackenreed spent nearly two decades protecting communities as a wildland firefighter. “I showed up for work, responded to emergencies and pushed through difficult experiences without fully understanding the impact they were having on me,” he writes. “Looking back, I now realize that the effects of repeated exposure to trauma were building for years.” Photo: Supplied by Matthew Brackenreed

My concern extends beyond my own situation.

I worry about the many firefighters, first responders and workers who may be experiencing similar struggles but are hesitant to come forward. The culture of emergency services often encourages resilience and perseverance, which are important qualities, but those same qualities can sometimes cause people to delay seeking help until their symptoms become severe.

By the time many firefighters finally ask for support, they may already be facing significant challenges in their personal and professional lives.

I am grateful for the health care professionals, family members and supporters who have helped me through this journey. Their support has been essential. At the same time, my experience has shown me how important it is that we continue improving awareness, education and support for occupational PTSD.

As wildfire seasons grow longer and more demanding, the mental health impacts on those who respond to these emergencies deserve greater attention. Protecting communities is vital, but we must also ensure that the people who dedicate their lives to that work are not forgotten when they are injured.

I am sharing my story because I believe occupational PTSD deserves greater public understanding and because I hope it encourages meaningful discussion about how we support those who serve in high-trauma professions.

What is almost as devastating as the injury itself is the lack of meaningful support available once a worker’s life begins to fall apart. On paper, there are programs and systems meant to help, but in reality I have found myself and my family trapped in a maze of delays, bureaucracy and uncertainty while my health has continued to decline. 

We have spent countless hours fighting for answers, advocating for basic needs and trying to navigate a system that often feels more focused on process than people. When someone is suffering from a psychological workplace injury, they shouldn’t have to fight another battle just to access support. No family should be left feeling isolated, exhausted and without a clear path forward while trying to survive the consequences of an injury sustained in service to their community.

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

Read the whole story
sarcozona
30 minutes ago
reply
Epiphyte City
Share this story
Delete

China Just got REALLY Serious with Trumps Illegal Sanctions

1 Comment

Today, I’m going to talk about the relatively new Chinese Anti-Foreign Sanctions Law. I made a video about this new law and some possible consequences back in April, it was called “why you can’t mess with China anymore”*

Let’s be honest, US sanctions are legal in the USA, but they are not legal in other countries - there are of course some countries which want to comply with US sanctions and punish China but the vast majority of countries, including many businesses inside of China are not willing but forced to comply.

A great example was, until quite recently the Chinese banks, when a Chinese corporation or individual was sanctioned, the Chinese banks were forced because they need access to the USD and the SWIFT system as well as other financial tools, to deny that person access to their funds. Imagine that, an individual working for a company in China who is sanctioned, can’t access their legally earned income which is based in their legally opened and lawfully operated bank account in China. It’s completely and totally ludicrous but if the Bank of China allowed access to the funds, then they themselves could be subject to secondary sanctions - I actually know someone personally that this happened to.

The US ensures compliance by threats, so bankers, shippers, container companies, many others involved in the chains that make economies tick are enforced into compliance with sanctions that are only legal in the USA. They were afraid that not enforcing them will have dire consequences on their own businesses so they operate in an illegal way and comply with a law that has no legal basis outside of the USA.

Well, not anymore. This week a Singaporean shipping company received a hefty fine in China, the fine was just short of 5 million RMB. What happened was, they had refused to fulfill a shipment from Shanghai to Panama and returned the goods because the Hong Kong shipper was included on a U.S. sanctions list. I hope you heard that, a Singaporean shipping company, nothing to do with the USA, refused a shipment that was sent from Shanghai, in China, to Panama in Central America, of products that were being shipped by a HK company that is sanctioned.

Had the goods been going to the USA, then this would not have been illegal, because the goods, or the company shipping them are sanctioned there and Chinese domestic law can’t change that.

However, the Shanghai Maritime Court ruled this as a breach of contract, China has not sanctioned this company, the US had nothing to do with the product, the shipping or the destination so, based on Article 12 of the new Anti-Foreign Sanctions Law, the court ordered compensation for the loss of over RMB 4.99 million plus interest. It went on to the Supreme People’s Court which subsequently listed it as a typical case, stating it was the first judicial judgment confirming the mandatory applicability of the law.

What we’re seeing here is world changing, it’s not a small matter, it’s actually huge China has stood up to the USA and is now telling every other country in the world you have a choice. If you decide that you are afraid of US sanctions and the consequences of disobedience to the “rules based order” then you don’t operate under international law

in other words, your fear of U.S. sanctions” will no longer serve as a reason to refuse performance. your choice now is do business with China legally or obey Washington and leave China - China just made the global economy into a zero sum game, if you want to obey Washington’s illegal sanctions you can, but you can’t operate with impunity inside China anymore

Some reports suggest that this is two sets of rule operating in co-existence, I prefer to describe it another way - it’s one set of rules, China’s telling the bully that their “rules based order” which are not recognised anywhere as a legal mechanism, won’t work anymore

Multinational corporations which operate inside of China and under US scrutiny have a real choice now. Comply with Chinese law, or don’t. If you don’t you’ll be fined and eventually it will be more expensive to operate in China when not complying with Chinese law.

The US might decide that it’s compliance with them or else... Well, the “or else” might be complete loss of Chinese business because China has decided not to comply and not to allow businesses in China to comply with unlawful sanctions - good on them!

*

Read the whole story
sarcozona
42 minutes ago
reply
Shit’s getting real
Epiphyte City
Share this story
Delete

USS Lincoln wasn't resupplied because Hegseth 'hid' that Iran destroyed main U.S. base: Rohde

1 Share
Read the whole story
sarcozona
1 hour ago
reply
Epiphyte City
Share this story
Delete

Bond Slump Sends Long-Term Debt Costs to Highest in Decades - Bloomberg

1 Share
Read the whole story
sarcozona
15 hours ago
reply
Epiphyte City
Share this story
Delete

Satellite operators are in panic mode due to a worsening launch crisis - Ars Technica

1 Share

This should be a golden era of launch.

During the last three years, an average of 270 orbital rockets have launched from Earth, a more than threefold increase from only a decade ago. By every metric available, the launch industry is crushing it: Prices have never been more competitive, launches never more frequent, and access to space never more rapid.

Paradoxically, though, there is a growing crunch in launch availability.

As part of his job as the director of research at Quilty Space, Caleb Henry speaks with satellite operators all the time. And he is hearing a constant and increasingly loud refrain from companies that want to put stuff into space.

“What we have is an industry in panic,” Henry said.

Anecdotes abound. A Canadian satellite company, Telesat, recently received inquiries from other companies asking if they would consider sharing some of the 11 Falcon 9 launches Telesat has booked for its new constellation. (Sorry, no, is the reply). The Amazon LEO constellation has had to throttle back production of satellites because few of the dozens of launches it booked half a decade ago are ready. And during an earnings call last Monday, officials from AST SpaceMobile said launch availability was now the pacing item for deploying its constellation.

With a growing number of constellations big and small, there is a huge and growing demand signal. The Commercial Space Federation predicts demand for thousands of satellite launches annually in less than a decade. Analysys Mason forecasted that more than 37,000 satellites will need to be launched between 2023 and 2033. Henry’s own firm, Quilty Space, has charted a change in the discussion from how many launch companies the US market can support to who can execute the fastest to meet surging satellite needs.

And if things are bad now, there are reasons to believe they may get even worse over the next two to four years.

Myriad factors are driving this crunch, but the principal concern of late has been SpaceX.

The company that is almost exclusively responsible for the dramatic increase in launch availability in the 2020s has signaled that it intends to wind down Falcon 9 operations as quickly as possible in favor of the larger Starship rocket. Some might see that as a good thing due to Starship’s enormous payload capacity. But there are growing concerns that SpaceX will largely focus on its own payloads—Starlink v3 satellites and orbital data centers—because of their potential to drive far greater profits. The Starship rocket’s PEZ satellite dispenser, optimized for Starlink, is an indication of the company’s priorities.

In financial documents, it’s clear that SpaceX views commercial launch as a rounding error compared to revenues from its own satellites in space. A majority of the company’s revenue ($4.3 billion out of $7.8 billion) during the second quarter of 2026 came from Starlink, whereas less than 12 percent was due to space services, of which commercial launch is but a fraction. This disparity is only likely to widen.

SpaceX has already moved beyond “peak” Falcon 9 operations. The company flew the rocket 165 times last year, and it will probably fly about 20 fewer missions this year. SpaceX is already making ground system changes to reflect these reductions.

The company’s president, Gwynne Shotwell, has previously said the operational lifetime of the Falcon 9 may end in 2030 or 2032. However, more recently, commercial satellite customers have been running into difficulties when trying to purchase a launch after 2028. One source said SpaceX has told the US government that it intends to end commercial launches after 2028 but will continue flying the Falcon 9 rocket for a limited number of federally contracted missions after that.

Whether or not these dates stick, it has become clear to commercial satellite operators that they can no longer reliably plan their future around the workhorse Falcon 9 rocket, creating a huge pain point for the commercial space industry in the United States and other Western countries.

This is because of an inescapable reality: Without SpaceX, the Western launch market would have been completely screwed over the last half-decade.

The war in Ukraine

On February 24, 2022, Russia launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine. This took Russian rockets off the table for Western countries, including European nations. Most immediately impacted was OneWeb, which lost some satellites already in Soyuz launch processing and eventually had to turn to a direct competitor, SpaceX and its Falcon 9 rocket, to complete its constellation.

The loss of the Soyuz and Proton rockets for Western commercial purposes came at the same time that two other leading providers were shutting down their older rockets for newer models. In Europe, the transition from the Ariane 5 to Ariane 6 rocket was underway. Across the pond, United Launch Alliance sought to end its dependence on Russian engines for the Atlas V rocket by migrating to the new Vulcan rocket.

Both projects had initially targeted completion by 2020, but by the time of the war’s outbreak, neither new vehicle was close to flying for the first time. Effectively, this meant that Arianespace and United Launch Alliance had a dwindling number of older rockets that were already spoken for.

Two solid-fueled boosters and a Vulcain 2.1 main engine propel the Ariane 6 rocket into the sky over French Guiana.
Two solid-fueled boosters and a Vulcain 2.1 main engine propel the Ariane 6 rocket into the sky over French Guiana. Credit: ESA – M. Pédoussaut

The war also offered a chance for two Asian nations with ties to the West, Japan and India, to step up. Both countries, with the H3 rocket in Japan and LVM3 in India, had been seeking to support the commercial satellite industry. But the H3’s debut slipped to 2023, and the first launch ended in failure. The eighth launch of the vehicle in 2025 was also a failure. To date, the vehicle has not been a commercial success and averages only a handful of launches a year. India’s LVM3 has launched even fewer times, just once or twice a year.

Amid all the opportunities to respond to Russia’s retreat from the Western market, only one company stood up. As Russian soldiers marched into Ukraine, SpaceX was beginning to perfect the reuse of the Falcon 9 rocket’s first stage. The company flew the Falcon rocket 31 times in 2021. By 2023, this number nearly tripled to 91 rockets.

As SpaceX’s main competitors struggled to bring new vehicles online, the Falcon 9 rocket flew and flew. It backstopped the entire Western Hemisphere’s launch needs, boosting everything from Europe’s prized Galileo satellites to NASA astronauts to Jeff Bezos’ Amazon LEO vehicles into orbit.

Waiting on Vulcan and New Glenn

The Ariane 6 rocket made its debut flight in July 2024 and has had a nice track record. But with a production goal of ten vehicles a year, the rocket won’t make a meaningful dent in the global need for launch capacity.

That left just two large rockets, the Vulcan vehicle and Blue Origin’s New Glenn booster, as the key vehicles to bring competition to SpaceX and help ease the growing demand for launch capacity in the mid-2020s.

The demand has long been evident. Even before these two rockets reached the launch pad, their launch manifests were booked up. In 2020, as part of the National Security Space Launch program, the US Space Force procured dozens of Vulcan launches for military missions. Two years later, Amazon purchased 38 Vulcan launches and options for up to 27 New Glenn flights for the Amazon program, which later would be renamed Amazon LEO. Both had more missions than they could fly for a while.

To compound problems, neither rocket has had an easy road from its debut (January 2024 for Vulcan, January 2025 for New Glenn) toward reaching a higher cadence.

Six years after the Space Force award, Vulcan has launched just two military missions. Vulcan has stumbled due to ongoing problems with the performance of its solid rocket boosters, which are provided by Northrop Grumman. The Pentagon has grown increasingly frustrated with the delays and has already moved several payloads previously intended for Vulcan onto SpaceX’s Falcon 9.

New Glenn got started even later than Vulcan, but it appeared to be reaching a nice cadence after successfully landing a first stage booster on the rocket’s second flight in November 2025. Unfortunately, tragedy struck in May of this year when the rocket exploded during a static fire test in Florida. This conflagration took out the vehicle’s only launch pad. New Glenn is therefore offline at least until the end of 2026, and despite the company’s professed optimism about returning to flight rapidly, probably into the early months of 2027.

So nearly half a decade after the onset of the Ukraine War, the Western launch market has not changed much. Ariane 6 has made a difference for Europe, but for the rest of the commercial launch industry, a holding pattern remains as Falcon 9 backstops all.

What about the next generation?

Vulcan and New Glenn are heavy lift rockets, but beyond them, a new generation of US medium-lift vehicles is in development.

The smallest is Stoke Space’s Nova rocket, which is intended to be fully reusable with a capacity of up to 7 tons to low-Earth orbit. Stoke’s chief executive, Andy Lapsa, has been careful not to release a target date publicly. However, during a recent visit to the company’s factory in Kent, Washington, company officials told Ars that they hope to deliver the flight version of the first stage to the launch site in Florida for testing this fall. A launch seems possible during the first half of 2027 if things go well.

Rocket Lab’s Neutron vehicle can loft 13 metric tons to low-Earth orbit in a reusable model and 15 tons in expendable. This vehicle’s launch target, which was once the year 2024, has slipped multiple times. According to its latest guidance, the company plans to ship Neutron to its launch site in Virginia before the end of this year. A debut launch in 2027 seems plausible but not guaranteed.

Since being acquired by Google billionaire Eric Schmidt, Relativity Space has been making steady progress on the large Terran R vehicle, which is intended to have a reusable mode lift capacity of 23.5 metric tons and 33.5 metric tons in expendable mode. Given recent progress with Terran R, a debut launch is plausible within the next 12 months, but since this is such a big rocket, there may be additional delays.

Rocket Lab’s Neutron rocket is shown in this rendering delivering a stack of satellites into orbit.
Rocket Lab’s Neutron rocket is shown in this rendering delivering a stack of satellites into orbit. Credit: Rocket Lab

Finally, Firefly and Northrop Grumman are developing the Eclipse rocket, which will have a lift capacity of 16 metric tons. Less is known about progress on this rocket, and it will most likely arrive later than the other vehicles on this list.

Even if one or more of these rockets makes its debut in 2027, none of the companies above have much experience with medium-lift growing pains. It will take time to scale up operations to produce more than a handful of launches per year. For this reason, Stoke’s vice president of business development, Devon Papandrew, thinks the launcher crisis will worsen in the next couple of years before conditions improve.

“I think it’s fair to say there’s more than a bit of a panic about the availability of launch,” Papandrew told Ars. “Even if the four medium-lift new entrants all achieve their goals in terms of flight success and cadence, it’s actually not going to make that much of a difference in demand right away. I’ve been saying for a while that I think 2028 is when this problem becomes really acute.”

So what will happen?

As the impending launch crisis comes to the industry, questions have begun to swirl about whether the federal government might intervene to keep the Falcon rockets flying. After all, NASA financially supported the development of the Falcon 9 and its launch pads to some degree through the Commercial Cargo program. And the US military has leverage over SpaceX through the National Security Space Launch Program.

Some of the wilder ideas involve forcing SpaceX to sell its Falcon 9 infrastructure to a third party—another space company, a space-interested billionaire, or someone else. Others have suggested that the US government could step in and nationalize SpaceX. That could be done if the US Congress passes a law stating that assured access to space is essential to national defense.

There are some major problems with this approach, though. Chief among them is that the Falcon 9 hardware and infrastructure work so well because of the engineers and technicians at SpaceX who have developed and continue to perfect the launch system. Many of these people would probably not want to work for a new employer (or the government) and would likely move to other positions or remain at SpaceX and move to the Starship program.

SpaceX founder Elon Musk would also have a massive war chest to oppose any such action, and because he is a large donor to Republicans, he would have considerable political capital to deploy.

And does it make sense to make war on SpaceX? The company’s success in launch and low-Earth orbit communications offers the United States its best weapon in the civil and national security contest with China, and lawmakers would likely be reluctant to kneecap that effort. For these reasons, space policy experts do not expect a serious conflict between the government and SpaceX over the future of the Falcon 9 rocket.

“Any government effort in this area to keep Falcon 9 flying would have to be mutually agreeable and beneficial to both parties,” said Scott Pace, director of the Space Policy Institute at George Washington University.

Pace and other policy experts said the US government could be taking actions now to address these problems, such as increasing the number of spaceports and being more accommodating of expansion at existing US launch facilities. Efforts could also be made to sign “technology safeguards agreements” with nations like Japan to allow US rockets to launch commercially from there and elsewhere in the world.

But the fundamental problems are not going away.

Over the last decade, many people in the US launch industry have issued forecasts that have been far too optimistic, and so far, only SpaceX has been able to rapidly increase its cadence. Demand has outstripped supply, and that will probably continue for some time.

“The way I think this pans out is we have a slow and eventual introduction of new vehicles and a slow and hopefully steady ramp up of rockets from incumbents,” Henry said. “And come the 2030s, we get some semblance of balance. But I don’t see it happening quickly, unfortunately.”

Read the whole story
sarcozona
1 day ago
reply
Epiphyte City
Share this story
Delete

DOGE Broke America’s Weather Machine. Now Fishermen, Insurers And Farmers Are Paying For It

1 Share

When Brian Ritchie takes his 53-foot charter fishing boat into the cold, choppy waters of the Cook Inlet near Homer, Alaska, carrying a dozen or more anglers hoping to catch Pacific halibut, he’s paying extra attention to weather conditions. That’s because an automated National Weather Service station that provided detailed local wind reports is offline and won’t be operational until at least November.

“It's a long season and we've gone half a year without knowing what the wind is doing in a part of the inlet that we fish a lot,” said Ritchie. “That's pretty important, especially for charter fishing. Because the people that I take out like watching ‘The Deadliest Catch,’ but they don't like living it.”

Ritchie’s weather station issue, which hasn’t resulted in any disasters so far, isn’t an isolated headache. Nationwide, launches of weather balloons have dropped, decreasing the amount of data on temperature, air pressure, humidity, wind speed and direction that feeds into weather prediction models, fire and marine weather forecasts and aids the aviation industry. Off U.S. coasts, fewer buoys are measuring wave conditions than in 2024. As wildfires rage across western states, there’s a tight supply of specialized meteorologists to provide detailed weather data that helps communities and firefighters make lifesaving, tactical decisions, people familiar with the matter told Forbes. A 20-year-old program that measures arctic ice just got cut, and plans for next-generation weather satellites to replace two critical ones that may begin to fail in the early 2030s have been halted.

This is what happens when the government dismantles the country’s vast environmental intelligence system. Built over decades, NOAA’s sprawling network of satellites, balloons, buoys, radar stations and scientists underpin much of the U.S. economy. Fishermen use it to decide whether waters are safe to sail. Farmers use it to determine when to plant and harvest. Airlines use it to route flights. Insurers and reinsurers use it to assess risk of losses from major events like hurricanes, fires and large-scale accidents. Utilities, builders and emergency officials use it to manage power grids, protect infrastructure and keep people alive.

“Sometimes its impacts are a little bit more diffuse unless you're directly employed by those sectors,” said Costa Samaras, director of Carnegie Mellon University’s Scott Institute for Energy Innovation, who advised the Biden administration on upgrading infrastructure for a warming climate. “There are also simple things like, ‘Will my street flood? Is there a hurricane approaching? Am I safe from tornadoes? These are all very tangible impacts people around the country tend to understand.”

Up to 6% of U.S. GDP is impacted by weather conditions, worth as much as $1.34 trillion annually

NOAA’s systems rarely announced their value. They just worked—until they didn’t. Now failures are arriving quietly: one dead weather station, one missing balloon, one stale map, one climate website at a time.

In dozens of interviews with current and former NOAA employees and representatives of industries that depend on its data, Forbes found that as America’s environmental intelligence goes dark piece by piece, it raises risks to lives and property while pushing new costs onto businesses and consumers. The systems and cuts made to them may seem obscure; the bill won’t be.

The root cause is Elon Musk’s DOGE program, which in early 2025 slashed jobs, budgets and programs in a Red Wedding massacre across all federal agencies. At the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), which houses the National Weather Service and is responsible for providing crucial intel about weather and climate patterns, it began with a 10% budget cut and the elimination of about 17% of staff, totalling about 2,500 people. Worse, among those who left were several hundred veteran NOAA and NWS researchers who took early retirement deals.

“DOGE ripped apart the agency," said Craig McLean, a career NOAA researcher and former chief scientist who retired from it in 2022 after more than 40 years. “Across NOAA in totality, 27,000 years of experience left by April of last year.”

Congress prevented deeper cuts, but the Trump administration is seeking a further 27% reduction in fiscal 2027, aiming to slash the budget to about $4.4 billion from $6.17 billion beginning this year, a move critics say would do even more wide-ranging harm.

UCG/Universal Images Group via Getty Images

“Even more damaging is the cutoff, not of future services, but of information products that are going stale across the board,” said Stephen Volz, a physicist who retired as an assistant administrator at NOAA in June. “That's where you see this thousand cuts of information ignorance.”

The National Weather Service is adding back staff, hiring 321 meteorologists, hydrologists, electronics technicians and physical scientists since late last year, said spokesman Christopher Vaccaro. He didn’t provide details on overall staffing at NOAA. Additionally, all 122 of NWS’s local weather forecast offices have enough staff to provide 24/7 forecasting operations, Vaccaro said.

Rachel Hager, with NOAA Fisheries, said it doesn’t discuss “personnel or internal management matters” and that it’s optimizing available resources.

“Perhaps no other federal entity facilitates greater economic and commercial activity than NOAA and its data sources”

Homer, Alaska’s dysfunctional weather station is just one example of how data collected by NOAA underpins not just weather apps, but shipping routes, insurance models and crop decisions. It informs construction choices made by architects, roadbuilders and city engineers, and triggers disaster warnings. Up to 6% of U.S. GDP is impacted by weather conditions, worth as much as $1.34 trillion annually. The National Weather Service estimated in 2024 that it produced $73 of value for taxpayers for every dollar invested into it.

“Perhaps no other federal entity facilitates greater economic and commercial activity than NOAA and its data sources,” Frank Nutter, former president of the Reinsurance Association of America (RAA), the financial industry that backstops insurance companies, told Congress in 2025 when lobbying to restore funding for NOAA that DOGE sought to cut.

That’s why NOAA is part of the Department of Commerce. “Weather impacts basically two-thirds of our economy in one way, shape or form,” said John Morales, a former NWS meteorologist and founder of consultancy ClimaData Corp. “And there are more things in harm's way nowadays. That's certainly a contributing factor to billion-dollar disasters increasing.”

Things like fewer weather balloons, ocean buoys and the fate of future weather satellites have some industries on edge. “Natural hazard observations and data access are core federal responsibilities and a critical national capability that serves every American,” said Karalee Morell, executive vice president and general counsel for RAA. Morell is particularly concerned about staffing shortages and how that’s impacting NOAA’s ability to gather the data that feeds into weather prediction models and forecasts essential to industries including construction, real estate, aviation and insurance that contribute hundreds of billions of dollars annually to the U.S. GDP.

Already, forecasters have been caught by surprise. In central Kansas, no one predicted two tornadoes that hit the region this past spring, apparently due to staffing shortages. Gaps in weather balloon coverage, also tied to fewer NOAA staff, led to less accurate predictions of Typhoon Halong’s intensity and storm path in western Alaska last October. Modeling by Alan Gerard, a former NWS meteorologist, shows a decline in the accuracy of the NWS’s global weather model between 2024 and 2025.

TNS

In the wake of Hurricane DOGE, complaints from industry groups and states led to bipartisan efforts to claw back funds for NOAA. For example, after deadly floods in Texas last summer, NWS was authorized to add 450 employees, but it appears to have only hired around 275 employees through the end of June. Most of those are less experienced than staff who took buyouts last year, said Margaret Cooney, an energy and climate policy specialist with the left-leaning Center for American Progress.

“They’ve gone into this extreme weather season a good 300 employees short and with reduced institutional knowledge of where they were pre-DOGE,” she said. “And with fewer resources and staff, current employees are stretched thin and without the tools needed to be consistently successful at their jobs.”

Today, NOAA researchers often aren't approved to travel to visit long-term measurement sites–like that weather station in Homer, Alaska–to do calibration and maintenance, according to a NOAA staffer who requested anonymity.

Over the past 18 months, NOAA data sites, including Climate.gov, Billion Dollar Weather and Climate Disasters, Radar Next, and regional marine and climate datasets, have been deactivated (though some of the research is being maintained by outside volunteers on non-government websites).

“The last year has been a heck of a rollercoaster,” said Chad Berginnis, executive director of the Association of State Floodplain Managers. His organization relies on NOAA data to guide the design of infrastructure like culverts, sewers and drainage channels to withstand intense rainfall and flooding. After the staff cuts, status reports on a critical update to that database, known as Atlas-15, stopped for months, though it’s back on track.

Similarly, weather satellites that take years to plan are functional, but future upgrades aren’t happening right now, said Volz, the former NOAA assistant administrator. “The satellite programs take a long time to build. They’re generational spacecraft systems–block upgrades you do every 10 to 20 years. And we’re about halfway, maybe two-thirds of the way through the block implementation for low-earth orbit” satellites, he said. But planning for replacements stopped last spring, after the DOGE team arrived, and “my biggest concern is that they are not going to be ready … when it needs to be in 2032,” Volz said.

Not everyone is experiencing disruptions. Carolyn Olson, who raises organic corn, soybeans, wheat and alfalfa in Cottonwood, Minnesota, and is vice president of the Minnesota Farmers Bureau, said the 10-day NWS forecasts she relies on to determine when to plant haven’t been affected by budget or staff cuts. And the NWS station in Sioux Falls, South Dakota, that produces them even “had a huge radar upgrade this summer,” she said.

“I may be more fortunate than some in other areas,” said Olson, a self-described weather nerd who was trained as a storm spotter by NWS and provides daily precipitation data from her farm to NOAA’s CoCoRaHS network.

More Cuts

Despite NOAA’s value to the economy, the Trump Administration wants to extend DOGE’s budget and staff cuts. Before his current role as director of the Office of Management and Budget, Russell Vought was the architect of Project 2025, a controversial collection of proposals for Trump’s second term that he denied knowledge of on the campaign trail but has largely adhered to as president.

NOAA “should be dismantled and many of its functions eliminated, sent to other agencies, privatized, or placed under the control of states and territories,” it declared. That didn’t happen under Musk, but Vought is still pushing for it in the 2027 budget request he submitted to Congress in April.

The proposal, which seeks to cut NOAA’s budget by $1.6 billion while boosting defense spending by $500 billion to $1.5 trillion in fiscal 2027, would terminate what Vought calls “Green New Scam programs at NOAA,” such as educational grants that “consistently funded efforts to radicalize students against markets, promote DEI, and spread baseless environmental alarm.”

“We’ve had to spend extra time working around the word ‘climate’” to sidestep the administration’s anti-climate science bent

NOAA researcher

The administration’s repudiation of climate science has meant that NOAA’s remaining staff must navigate linguistic hurdles. “We’ve had to spend extra time working around the word ‘climate,’” according to anonymous comments from staffers shared with Forbes. In seeking research funding, for example, that means replacing the word “climate” with “changing ecosystems” or “seasonal changes,” according to people familiar with the matter.

“We are trying to do the same climate-type work (albeit with fewer people) but have to tiptoe around so we can stay under the radar,” one person said.

That anti-climate militancy has hit projects that have nothing to do with climate science. Bill Dewey, a spokesman for aquaculture company Taylor Seafood who also runs a shellfish farm of his own off the coast of Washington, says his farm was part of a NOAA grant to harvest algae and transfer it to terrestrial fields to enhance the soil.

The Washington Post via Getty Images

“But because the title of the project was ‘Blue Carbon to Green Fields,’ it got canceled by the administration,” he said. The $5 million NOAA grant, for a study to be done by the University of Washington, was to determine if the algae is beneficial for farmed crops. It’s been partially restored, but without funding for scientific research.

“They're going to give me a little bit of money to harvest my seaweed and give it to some farmers,” Dewey said. “Hopefully, we can do some level of research to understand whether there's actually a benefit to it or not.”

NOAA’s challenges are also impacting Taylor Seafood, which sells $80 million a year of oysters, clams, mussels and geoducks raised off the coast of Washington state. Dewey said NOAA research on ocean acidification, which harms its crop, probably saved the 136-year-old company back in 2009. But now a new habitat restoration research plan Taylor submitted to NOAA isn’t moving as fast as hoped, apparently because of fewer scientific resources at the agency.

“We've been frustrated with the pace,” he said.

Private Data

Vought’s proposed gutting of NOAA is predicated in part on his desire that the agency’s functions should be privatized. Floodplain managers like Berginnis or civil engineers and urban planners fear that would raise costs and lead to unreliable data.

Cities and states would have to begin paying private data companies for information previously funded by federal taxes, said Marsha Anderson Bomar, president of the American Society of Civil Engineers and a long-time engineer for the city of Atlanta and its transit agency. Both she and Berginnis also worry private companies won’t be as open about their methodology as NOAA, making the data less trustworthy.

“What is your confidence that they have the experts who are going to make sure that we have the right data in the right form that is accurate, verified and validated? All those things that engineers worry about,” she told Forbes. “Because if I use a data source that I don't know for sure has been validated, I could be way off. It only takes a small error in an early calculation to have something go very wrong.”

Musk and Vought may not value what NOAA does, but maintaining the breadth of its work is a priority across multiple industries.

“Collecting basic data isn’t sexy, so it doesn't capture the public's mind or eye, but I guarantee you it’s foundational to not only our hazard reduction efforts, but I think to our very success as a country,” said floodplain manager Berginnis.

“Having good, solid science and data allows us to build programs and policies and all those things on top of it. You take away that foundation and I’m very, very concerned about what direction that takes us.”

More from Forbes

ForbesMusk Escalates Unproven USAID Claims In Fiery Posts—As Studies Link DOGE Cuts To Child DeathsForbesWhy Elon Musk’s China Ties Are DOGE’s Biggest Conflict Of InterestForbesElon Musk Is A Billionaire Federal Welfare Vampire
Read the whole story
sarcozona
1 day ago
reply
Epiphyte City
Share this story
Delete
Next Page of Stories