Proposal to commercialize NOAA Weather Data

Open to everyone

Moderator: Chip

Post Reply
getnoutside
Posts: 751
Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2005 11:51 am
Location: Marshfield
Contact:

Proposal to commercialize NOAA Weather Data

Post by getnoutside »

From BoatUS:

Legislation introduced by Santorum, S. 786, would restrict NOAA’s broadcasting to emergency weather, like hurricanes and tornados and permit private companies like AccuWeather and The Weather Channel to get all of its daily weather information from NOAA for free. These companies would then turn around and sell the continuous weather updates to the public that NOAA used to provide free of charge.


According to Sailing Magazine, guess who was a major contributor to Senator Santorum's election campaign? Yep... AccuWeather.

For the complete BoatUS story: http://boatus.com/gov/sb786.htm
getnoutside
Posts: 751
Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2005 11:51 am
Location: Marshfield
Contact:

Post by getnoutside »

I just gave this some more thought. How does this sit with you?

As US Taxpaying citizens, we pay for NOAA to collect weather data. Based on the proposal, this would continue. However, it is proposed that NOAA would then sell this data to a 3rd party who will then bump up the price and sell, what we've already paid for, back to us.

Image
User avatar
pat
Site Admin
Posts: 2266
Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2005 11:04 am

Post by pat »

This is one of these things where I foolishly believe that our elected representatives would <i>never</i> allow something as ludicrous as this to pass. But perhaps I'm wrong...
Image Impex Currituck
Pat Traynor - site admin
pat@ssih.com
User avatar
Chip
Posts: 1723
Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2005 11:14 am
Location: Weymouth

Post by Chip »

And how does this change benefit the public? :x Hopefully, this will be shot down.
Current Designs Solstice GTS
Placid Boatworks Rapidfire
getnoutside
Posts: 751
Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2005 11:51 am
Location: Marshfield
Contact:

Post by getnoutside »

I hope you're right, Pat. Let me correct a mis-statement I made previously. According to BoatUS, the 3rd parties WOULD NOT have to pay for the data from NOAA. So, they get it for free (after our taxes pay for it), and turn around and sell us what we've alrady paid for.
chpaton
Posts: 415
Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2005 3:43 pm
Location: Quincy

Another example of legislative folly

Post by chpaton »

I'm cetainly not interested in having to pay AccuWeather to get something I currently get from NOAA for my tax dollar.

On the other hand, if AccuWeather wants to take the Marine Forecast and make it more accesible, readable and user friendly etc. AND have me "pay for it" by having to ignore some "boater focused" ads on a Web site. I could care less. I can see why the "privates" would want NOAA out of the business of providing regular weather info to the general public - it would send more traffic their way - I'm sure it would be "free" in that no fee for access would be charged (there are other ways of making money - like sponsorships & adds). But I'm not sure how much interest they would have in Marine Weather.

Marine Weather, no matter how you slice it, is a niche market. I don't think AccuWeather, or Weather Channel would do it as thoroughly or as effectively as NOAA. Like with a number of marginal enterprises, the public sector has the market because the private sector is dis-inclined to do it as the profit margin is not substantial enough.

That said, we should still lobby our reps to defeat the bill!
Craig
Hurricane A/S Tracer Yellow/White
Heritage Shearwater - Red/White
Heritage Tandem - Mango
Post Reply