Do We Really Need a National Climate Service?

coondoggie writes "I suppose it's natural for Washington to try and wrap issues up in a tidy legislative package for bureaucratic purposes (or perhaps other things more nefarious). But one has to wonder if we really need another government-led group, especially when it comes to the climate and all the sometimes controversial information that entails. But that's what is under way. Today the House Science and Technology Committee's Subcommittee on Energy and Environment held a hearing on the need for a National Climate Service, that could meet the increased demand for climate information, the committee said. The NCS would provide a single point of contact of information climate forecasts and support for planning and management decisions by federal agencies; state, local, and tribal governments; and the private sector."

Comments

Re:Yes

[ruckc]

Way to go. We already have a national weather service. Why would you encourage the government to create yet another redundant service.

I thought tracking weather involved tracking the history of weather, which would lead me to believe that it would take a small investment into the national weather service to create a climate forcasting/monitoring service. Oh wait, NOAA's NWS already tracks climate.

Re:Obviously it's a good thing.

[bsane]

a better state than how they got it

What if I don't agree with what greenpeace is shoving down my throat as 'a better state'?

One could argue that all Halliburton wants to do is leave the world in a better state... as defined by them- really the same goal as greenpeace, just different definitions of 'better'.