Author Topic: Earth Science Decadal Survey  (Read 303 times)

Offline AegeanBlue

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 429
  • Raleigh
  • Liked: 96
  • Likes Given: 35
Earth Science Decadal Survey
« on: 01/05/2018 10:40 PM »
Earth Science is the more neglected part of this forum. Looking for life in another body in the solar system and exploring the far frontier is far more exciting to the general public, and apparently NSF posters, than tracking and understanding how the Earth is changing. Today the National Academies released their Decadal Survey for Earth Science and a livestreamed press conference took place:

https://livestream.com/NASEM/ESAS2017

There is already a series of articles on the web about that press conference, which I have no doubt will only increase. The most interesting article I found was on how the previous 2007 Decadal's recommended missions went:

http://spacenews.com/2007decadal/

Now as far as I know the Germans are developing a mission similar to HyspIRI but otherwise 3/17 does not look good, especially when you consider that the Obama administration prioritized Earth Science. The article could be a bit misleading because I am not seeing Landsat 8 and 9 there, but then again Landsat is a USGS, not a NASA mission. Per the article there were huge disparities in the 2007's decadal survey's price tags and what the actual satellites that were launched cost. It would be nice to hear from people more knowledgeable on this front, much as the Space Science and exploration discussion takes places online, for Earth Science it seems to mostly take place at the ASPRS and AGU conferences during the sessions and happy hours.

Offline AegeanBlue

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 429
  • Raleigh
  • Liked: 96
  • Likes Given: 35
Re: Earth Science Decadal Survey
« Reply #1 on: 01/08/2018 05:50 PM »
The actual decadal report is here:

https://www.nap.edu/catalog/24938/thriving-on-our-changing-planet-a-decadal-strategy-for-earth

Do not be scared by the pay tag, if you click on "read online" you can read it. The price is for the printed version. I have been reading the continuing coverage, especially in articles in Science and Nature. In the 2007 survey the proposed missions were specific, tied to NASA field centers. In the 2017 report the committee proposes the desired end product, not the specific mission though in several cases proposed missions are intended to produced the specific product. Apparently there is a tension in earth observation between data continuity and getting new types of data, both of which require missions and money. Compared to the other divisions of NASA Science Earth Science was very well funded under the Obama administration, yet it could not meet its new mission goals from 2007 since a large part of this funding went into plugging gaps left by the neglect of the George W. Bush administration, think Landsat 8 and now 9 which is under construction. In my personal opinion it would be great it USGS would get Landsat construction budget like NOAA gets its weather satellites budget. However, knowing that Congress is likely to transfer this money from NASA rather than give extra new money to USGS, it is likely not a good idea. Cuts to USGS's budget are far less visible than cuts to NASA's budget.

Tags: