[House Hearing, 115 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
SURVEYING THE SPACE WEATHER LANDSCAPE
=======================================================================
JOINT HEARING
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT &
SUBCOMMITTEE ON SPACE
COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
April 26, 2018
__________
Serial No. 115-56
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available via the World Wide Web: http://science.house.gov
_________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
30-319 PDF WASHINGTON : 2018
COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY
HON. LAMAR S. SMITH, Texas, Chair
FRANK D. LUCAS, Oklahoma EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas
DANA ROHRABACHER, California ZOE LOFGREN, California
MO BROOKS, Alabama DANIEL LIPINSKI, Illinois
RANDY HULTGREN, Illinois SUZANNE BONAMICI, Oregon
BILL POSEY, Florida AMI BERA, California
THOMAS MASSIE, Kentucky ELIZABETH H. ESTY, Connecticut
RANDY K. WEBER, Texas MARC A. VEASEY, Texas
STEPHEN KNIGHT, California DONALD S. BEYER, JR., Virginia
BRIAN BABIN, Texas JACKY ROSEN, Nevada
BARBARA COMSTOCK, Virginia CONOR LAMB, Pennsylvania
BARRY LOUDERMILK, Georgia JERRY McNERNEY, California
RALPH LEE ABRAHAM, Louisiana ED PERLMUTTER, Colorado
DANIEL WEBSTER, Florida PAUL TONKO, New York
JIM BANKS, Indiana BILL FOSTER, Illinois
ANDY BIGGS, Arizona MARK TAKANO, California
ROGER W. MARSHALL, Kansas COLLEEN HANABUSA, Hawaii
NEAL P. DUNN, Florida CHARLIE CRIST, Florida
CLAY HIGGINS, Louisiana
RALPH NORMAN, South Carolina
------
Subcommittee on Environment
HON. ANDY BIGGS, Arizona, Chair
DANA ROHRABACHER, California SUZANNE BONAMICI, Oregon, Ranking
BILL POSEY, Florida Member
MO BROOKS, Alabama COLLEEN HANABUSA, Hawaii
RANDY K. WEBER, Texas CHARLIE CRIST, Florida
BRIAN BABIN, Texas EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas
BARRY LOUDERMILK, Georgia
JIM BANKS, Indiana
CLAY HIGGINS, Louisiana
RALPH NORMAN, South Carolina
LAMAR S. SMITH, Texas
------
Subcommittee on Space
HON. BRIAN BABIN, Texas, Chair
DANA ROHRABACHER, California AMI BERA, California, Ranking
FRANK D. LUCAS, Oklahoma Member
MO BROOKS, Alabama ZOE LOFGREN, California
BILL POSEY, Florida DONALD S. BEYER, JR., Virginia
STEPHEN KNIGHT, California MARC A. VEASEY, Texas
BARBARA COMSTOCK, Virginia DANIEL LIPINSKI, Illinois
RALPH LEE ABRAHAM, Louisiana ED PERLMUTTER, Colorado
DANIEL WEBSTER, Florida CHARLIE CRIST, Florida
JIM BANKS, Indiana BILL FOSTER, Illinois
ANDY BIGGS, Arizona EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas
NEAL P. DUNN, Florida
CLAY HIGGINS, Louisiana
LAMAR S. SMITH, Texas
C O N T E N T S
April 26, 2018
Page
Witness List..................................................... 2
Hearing Charter.................................................. 3
Opening Statements
Statement by Representative Andy Biggs, Chairman, Subcommittee on
Environment, Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, U.S.
House of Representatives....................................... 4
Written Statement............................................ 6
Statement by Representative Suzanne Bonamic, Ranking Member,
Subcommittee on Environment, Committee on Science, Space, and
Technology, U.S. House of Representatives...................... 8
Written Statement............................................ 9
Statement by Representative Brian Babin, Chairman, Subcommittee
on Space, Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, U.S.
House of Representatives....................................... 10
Written Statement............................................ 12
Statement by Representative Ami Bera, Ranking Member,
Subcommittee on Space, Committee on Science, Space, and
Technology, U.S. House of Representatives...................... 14
Written Statement............................................ 16
Statement by Representative Lamar Smith, Chairman, Committee on
Science, Space, and Technology, U.S. House of Representatives.. 18
Written Statement............................................ 20
Statement by Representative Eddie Bernice Johnson, Ranking
Member, Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, U.S. House
of Representatives............................................. 22
Written Statement............................................ 24
Witnesses:
Dr. Neil Jacobs, Assistant Secretary of Commerce for
Environmental Observation and Prediction, National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration
Oral Statement............................................... 27
Written Statement............................................ 29
Dr. Jim Spann, Chief Scientist, Heliophysics Division, Science
Mission Directorate, National Aeronautics and Space
Administration
Oral Statement............................................... 36
Written Statement............................................ 38
Dr. Sarah Gibson, Senior Scientist, High Altitude Observatory,
National Center for Atmospheric Research and Co-Chair,
Committee on Solar and Space Physics, National Academy of
Science
Oral Statement............................................... 42
Written Statement............................................ 44
Dr. W. Kent Tobiska, President and Chief Scientist, Space
Environment Technologies
Oral Statement............................................... 58
Written Statement............................................ 60
Discussion....................................................... 78
Appendix I: Answers to Post-Hearing Questions
Dr. Neil Jacobs, Assistant Secretary of Commerce for
Environmental Observation and Prediction, National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration..................................... 124
Dr. Jim Spann, Chief Scientist, Heliophysics Division, Science
Mission Directorate, National Aeronautics and Space
Administration................................................. 127
Dr. Sarah Gibson, Senior Scientist, High Altitude Observatory,
National Center for Atmospheric Research and Co-Chair,
Committee on Solar and Space Physics, National Academy of
Science........................................................ 129
Dr. W. Kent Tobiska, President and Chief Scientist, Space
Environment Technologies....................................... 137
SURVEYING THE SPACE WEATHER LANDSCAPE
----------
THURSDAY, APRIL 26, 2018
House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on Environment and
Subcommittee on Science,
Committee on Science, Space, and Technology,
Washington, D.C.
The Subcommittees met, pursuant to call, at 10:01 a.m., in
Room 2318 of the Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Andy Biggs
[Chairman of the Subcommittee on Environment] presiding.
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairman Biggs. The Subcommittee on Environment and Space
will come to order. And without objection, the Chair is
authorized to declare recesses of the Subcommittee at any time.
Welcome to today's hearing entitled ``Surveying the Space
Weather Landscape.'' I now recognize myself for five minutes
for an opening statement.
And I welcome you again to this important subcommittee
hearing of the Environment Subommittee and the Space
Subcommittee as well entitled ``Surveying the Space Weather
Landscape.'' And first, I thank each Member of this panel here
today. We have excellent witnesses, and I'm excited to hear
their testimony on this important topic.
With an issue as complex and consequential as this one, it
is important that we begin a dialogue on where we are and where
we are going. There are many exciting developments in space
weather, from innovative space weather technologies and the
accuracy of space weather forecasting models, to the potential
impacts space weather can have on our terrestrial environment.
All of these topics are important and worth addressing, but
I think it's crucial that we first lay the groundwork for
understanding the current policies, procedures, and major
players in both the private and public sectors. And I'm pleased
to have key stakeholders from private industry, as well as
academia, along with leaders from the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and the National Aeronautics
and Space Administration (NASA) with us today. I look forward
to hearing from them about not only what their efforts have
been in this arena, but also what they think the future holds
for the observation, modeling, and forecasting of space weather
events.
Just as it is a primary driver of weather on Earth, the Sun
is also the largest driver of disturbances in our space
environment. Solar winds, whose charge and intensity ebbs and
flows with various solar phenomena, interact with Earth's
magnetic field in interesting and sometimes highly adverse
ways. The result of these interactions are what we refer to as
space weather storms. While often relegated to the
magnetosphere, these storms can and do have tangible and
sometimes highly damaging effects in the upper atmosphere and
at the terrestrial level. These can range from issues with the
performance and reliability of space-borne and ground-based
technological systems, all the way to endangering human life or
health.
As with terrestrial weather, without thorough monitoring
and accurate modeling, we simply have no good way to predict
space weather events and, in turn, no ability to ensure that
citizens are kept out of harm's way if severe events arise. In
the federal government, NASA and NOAA are tasked with
monitoring and issuing forecasts that inform the public. To
make these forecasts, countless dollars are spent on
observation and data collection, but despite this, space
weather science as a discipline is still in its nascent phase.
While I have no doubt that NASA and NOAA play a vital role
in monitoring solar phenomena and making space weather
forecasts, we need to explore whether it makes sense to rely
solely on government for addressing space weather challenges.
In the 21st century, the landscape has changed, and as we can
see from our witnesses today, the federal government isn't the
only game in town, nor should it be.
Forecasting space weather depends on understanding the
fundamental processes that give rise to hazardous events.
Particularly important is the study of processes that link the
Sun-Earth system and that control the flow of energy toward our
planet. Partners in the private sector can and should use their
advanced, innovative technologies to help us more thoroughly
understand these phenomena and improve our space weather
predictions. In the face of space weather challenges, instead
of continuing to think inside the ``government-only'' box, NASA
and NOAA need to look to private partners who are ready and
willing to help.
Last year, President Trump signed into law the Weather
Research and Forecasting Innovation Act, a comprehensive bill
to increase our weather forecasting capabilities to better
protect lives and property. What I like most about this
legislation is that it requires personnel within government
agencies to innovate by partnering with the growing private
sectors in testing and validating its data in order to enhance
our nation's forecasting capacity and capabilities. It is my
hope that, on the subject of space weather, we will continue to
look to the Weather Research and Forecasting Innovation Act as
a model.
Adverse space weather presents unique challenges, and the
consequences of inaction could be far-reaching and
catastrophic. However, I believe that through the right
combination of government monitoring, private industry
innovation, and good old American determination, we will be
able to respond to any future challenges that may arise. I look
forward to learning more today from our excellent panel of
witnesses about this topic, about their efforts to advance
understanding in this field, and about the technologies and
methods that will lead the way to a better and smarter future.
And with that, I yield back the balance of my time.
[The prepared statement of Chairman Biggs follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairman Biggs. I now recognize the gentleman from Colorado
sitting in for the Ranking Member of the Environment
Subcommittee, Mr. Perlmutter, for an opening statement.
Mr. Perlmutter. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I'd also like
to thank Chairman Smith for convening today's hearing. I'd also
like to thank each of our witnesses because we have an
excellent panel to talk to us today about space weather, and
I'd especially like to thank two of my friends, Colorado
Buffaloes Dr. Gibson and Dr. Tobiska, for joining us today.
I've been interested in space weather for a number of
years. Colorado has some of the best minds, laboratories, and
research institutions on space weather in the country. We have
institutions like CU Boulder and the National Center for
Atmospheric Research, as well as NOAA's Space Weather
Prediction Center. That is why Senator Cory Gardner from
Colorado worked with Senator Gary Peters from Michigan to pass
the Space Weather Research and Forecasting Act in the Senate,
and it's why I've been encouraging this committee to support
this legislation and be active on the space weather needs of
the academic and research community.
We talk frequently about space weather as a catastrophic
event, and it can be. A Carrington-level event, which more or
less shut down electrical grids and communications all over the
place, or the 2012 event, which shut down Quebec's power grid,
are worthy of our attention. But what I've learned is that
space weather is a daily phenomenon which impacts our
electrical grid, our airlines flying over the poles, precision
agriculture, and much more.
It is clear there is significant economic consequence to
our lack of knowledge and prediction of space weather. That's
why I've proposed H.R. 3086, the Space Weather Research and
Forecasting Act. It will build upon the success of the National
Space Weather Strategy and the National Space Weather Action
Plan to better incorporate academic, commercial, and
international partners into our space weather enterprise.
I look forward to your testimony today and the discussion
so that we can educate ourselves and work with the academic and
commercial industries to build on the successes of the last
several years and remain focused on improving space weather
research and forecasting.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Perlmutter follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Perlmutter. And if I might, Mr. Chair, I'd like to
introduce the newest member of our committee.
Chairman Biggs. Please.
Mr. Perlmutter. So I'd like to introduce Conor Lamb. You
can stand up and take a bow.
Conor was sworn in on April 12----
Mr. Lamb. Twirl around, too----
Mr. Perlmutter. No, no, it's--2018 to represent
Pennsylvania's 18th Congressional District, which includes
parts of Allegheny, Westmoreland, Washington, and Greene
Counties in southwestern Pennsylvania. And I took some time to
encourage Conor to join this committee because there are places
where we have--lots of places where we have common ground and
we work together, we collaborate to advance science. There are
places where we have spirited disagreements, and so we really
do welcome you.
And I should alert my Republican friends that Conor
previously served as an Assistant U.S. Attorney in the Justice
Department's Pittsburgh office, where he prosecuted violent
crimes and drug trafficking and helped establish the office as
a national leader in the fight against the heroin epidemic. So
we wanted to bring somebody aboard who also could argue if
necessary.
Lamb served on active duty in the United States Marine
Corps from 2009 to 2013 and continues to serve as a Major in
the United States Marine Corps Reserves. Conor lives in Mount
Lebanon, where he grew up. He is a graduate of Pittsburgh
Central Catholic High School and went to college and law school
at the University of Pennsylvania. 2006 is when he graduated
undergrad and 2009 from law school.
So I'd like to welcome Conor Lamb to the Committee, and I
know the rest of the Committee will welcome him, too.
Chairman Biggs. Indeed, welcome, Representative Lamb. Glad
to have you on the Committee.
Mr. Lamb. Still learning how these work. Thank you very
much, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Biggs. Thank you.
Mr. Lamb. You're welcome.
Chairman Biggs. And now, I recognize the Chairman of the
Space Subcommittee, the gentleman from Texas, Mr. Babin, for an
opening statement.
Mr. Babin. Yes, sir. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I also
would like to welcome Mr. Lamb to our committee. We have a
great committee here, and we're quite bipartisan on many, many
issues, although, as Mr. Perlmutter said, sometimes it does get
heated on certain issues. But welcome.
Mr. Lamb. Thank you.
Mr. Babin. Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to
conduct this joint hearing. I look forward to the testimony of
our witnesses. Specifically, I am interested to hear their
insights and observations from the recent Space Weather
Workshop in Colorado. Understanding and predicting space
weather is critical to protecting American infrastructure and
human safety both in space and on the ground.
While government agencies have made steady advances in this
area, we must now explore ways to expand our capabilities and
begin leveraging the private sector. As we begin preparations
for space exploration outside the protection of Earth's
magnetosphere, the Space Subcommittee is keenly aware that
understanding and predicting space weather is more important
than ever for the safety of our astronauts and the achievement
of our exploration goals.
Perhaps even more tangible are the effects of space weather
here on Earth. And while space weather can give us some of the
most beautiful sights on Earth--the aurora borealis, or the
northern lights--there are also many negative effects of space
weather that often go unseen. Strong space weather events can
knock out electrical grids, corrode pipelines and disrupt
satellite communications. Many, including the brave men and
women serving our country, rely on critical information
gathered by in-space infrastructure like GPS and remote
sensing. These space-based assets are particularly vulnerable
to the effects of space weather.
It is time to develop a plan to protect ourselves from
these events. NASA's continued research and development of
space weather satellites will provide more advanced American
capabilities. That, combined with NOAA's work in data analysis
and space weather prediction, comprise a strong government
effort. However, the progress does not come without cost, which
is why we must look to the private industry moving forward.
The Deep Space Climate Observatory, also known as DSCOVR,
is a good example for defining roles and responsibilities.
DSCOVR, built by NASA, is NOAA's first operational satellite in
deep space, orbiting a million miles from Earth in order to
provide early warnings of potentially harmful space weather.
This NOAA operational capability for space weather analysis and
prediction was established through the technology transition of
unique scientific instruments researched and developed by NASA.
I contend this model represents the way forward for interagency
space weather activities.
As the private sector continues to move into low-Earth
orbit, more and more companies will be relying on space weather
predictions to protect their assets. Space weather is another
area of great commercial opportunity in space, and, as we have
in the past, we must continue to encourage and leverage these
private endeavors for the benefit of all Americans. The threats
posed by space weather events can be mitigated through advanced
research and prediction methods. I hope that this hearing today
will shed light on our current space weather projects and how
we can continue achieving American excellence in such a very
critical area.
I want to thank our witnesses for being here today, for
their testimony, and I'm looking forward to the discussion and
hearing--and shedding some light on this issue.
I yield back. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Babin follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairman Biggs. Thank you, Mr. Babin.
I now recognize the Ranking Member of the Space
Subcommittee, the gentleman from California, Mr. Bera, for an
opening statement.
Mr. Bera. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I want to welcome
the witnesses and add my welcome to our colleague from
Pennsylvania, Mr. Lamb. I think Conor is going to find that
this is one of the best committees to be on in the sense of the
topics that we're talking about. And I think if there were
Neilson ratings for C-SPAN committee viewership, I think we
would be at the top of that because the riveting topics that we
talk about, habitable planets, how we're going to deep space,
as Mr. Perlmutter would say--let me get that out there--how we
go to Mars by 2033. And today's topic is no different, you
know, the importance of understanding and forecasting space
weather.
I mean, as we think about, you know, how dependent--our
communications, our electrical ability, our navigational
systems are on, you know, on space weather and how vulnerable
they are, it becomes increasingly important. And we know NASA's
research and observations in solar and space physics has been
instrumental in achieving our current capabilities for space
weather monitoring and prediction. The Advanced Composition
Explorer and the joint European Space Agency/NASA mission, both
launched over 20 years ago, along with other NASA spacecrafts
such as STEREO and the Solar Dynamics Observatory provide
critical information in forecasting solar eruptions and their
movement through the heliosphere.
That said, it's also important for us to understand that
we're only at the early stages of our ability to predict and
forecast space weather. Improving our current capabilities will
require investment in basic research, additional observations,
models, and the ability to transition models into operational
use.
The National Academies 2012 Heliophysics Decadal Survey
stated, ``Achievement of critical continuity of key space
environment parameters, their utilization in advanced models,
and application to operations constitute a major endeavor that
will require unprecedented cooperation among agencies in the
area in which each has specific expertise and unique
capabilities.''
To that end, Mr. Chairman, the National Space Weather
Strategy and Space Weather Action Plan provide goals for
federal agencies to organize our research and operational
efforts on space weather and responses to extreme space weather
events. The Senate passed bill, and the companion House Bill
introduced by Mr. Perlmutter would ensure continued interagency
coordination and encourage increased involvement with
international, academic, and commercial sectors.
Mr. Chairman, the nation's efforts to deal with space
weather demonstrate the ways in which our investments in basic
research and NASA benefit our society. In the case of space
weather, these investments are integral in ensuring the safety
and operations of our critical infrastructure on the ground and
in space.
I look forward to hearing from our witnesses on what is
needed to advance our nation's understanding and our ability to
monitor, predict, and forecast space weather.
Thank you, and with that, I yield back.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Bera follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairman Biggs. Thank you, Mr. Bera.
I now recognize the Chairman of the full Committee, the
gentleman from Texas, Mr. Smith, for an opening statement.
Chairman Smith. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you and
Chairman Babin for holding this hearing.
While we are all familiar with terrestrial or Earth
weather, what exactly space weather is and why it deserves our
attention is much less widely understood. Broadly speaking,
space weather is the way the behavior of the Sun and the nature
of Earth's magnetic field and atmosphere interact. At a more
detailed level, space weather is as complex of an issue as it
is a consequential one.
At the center of space weather, as with terrestrial
weather, are storms. The type and intensity of these storms can
vary widely, but all space weather storms do have one thing in
common and that is they are affected by the Sun. Solar
phenomena, like solar flares, send streams of charged particles
toward Earth as solar wind. Once solar wind reaches Earth, it
interacts in surprising and hugely consequential ways with our
magnetic field. The impact of these interactions varies and is
dependent upon the intensity of the charge and concentration of
particles in the solar wind.
However, disastrous events like GPS disruptions, satellites
knocked out of orbit, and permanent damage to large swaths of
the electric grid are possible and, over time, even likely. As
a general rule, the damage done by space weather events will be
proportional to the amount of advanced technology exposed. In
our modern, technology-laden world, a large storm could be
incredibly costly both in terms of dollars and lives.
Geomagnetic-induced currents that result from space weather
can damage oil pipelines, railways, power grids, and complex
technology by causing extensive voltage surges. In the case of
power grids, these currents have the potential to damage both
transmission lines and transformers, which could potentially
lead to the collapse of entire distribution networks.
Space weather is also dangerous to human life. Astronauts
on the International Space Station and commercial aviation
flights and their passengers could be exposed to significantly
larger and unsafe amounts of radiation during space weather
events. Astronauts do have technologies in place to help
protect them. Flights can be rerouted and grounded. But these
quick, piecemeal fixes are not sustainable solutions to a
potential major solar weather event.
Just as we currently forecast the active elements of
terrestrial weather involving water, temperature, and air, so
too is there potential to do the same for space weather. In
fact, efforts to model solar activity and forecast the active
elements of space weather--the concentration of particles,
electromagnetic energy, and magnetic field impacts--are already
underway at federal agencies and private entities.
The recent White House Office of Science and Technology
Policy and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration's request for information about space weather
and ways commercial entities can help deserves our support. The
efforts the private sector has been taking are promising and we
should encourage them.
We are increasingly dependent on advanced technology. The
potential for disruption to society, including the possible
destruction of critical infrastructure by space weather events,
is alarming. While we have made strides toward better modeling
and prediction of solar phenomena, as well as accurately
forecasting space weather, there is still significant room for
improvement.
I look forward to learning from our witnesses today and
hearing their insights and perspectives on this topic. This
committee has a bipartisan history of meeting the challenges
and advancing U.S. leadership in space, and I am hopeful space
weather will be no exception.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
[The prepared statement of Chairman Smith follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairman Smith. And before I yield back, two things to
mention, and that is I regret I'm going to have to shuttle back
and forth between this hearing and the Judiciary Committee, but
I hope to be back. And second, although I realized he has
already been welcomed, I'd like to welcome Conor here for his
first Science Committee hearing. Conor, I have a binder here
for you of a lot of our activities and a lot of our
jurisdiction, which I'll pass on to you after the Ranking
Member finishes her statement. But we're glad to have you, and
I appreciate Conor Lamb as being a Member of this Committee as
well.
Chairman Biggs. Thank you, Chairman Smith. I now recognize
the Ranking Member of the full Committee, the gentlewoman from
Texas, Ms. Johnson, for an opening statement.
Ms. Johnson. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
And before I do my statement, I too, would like to welcome
Mr. Lamb and say that I know he's facing more Texans on this
committee than practically any other committee here, but don't
let that frighten you. We always look--know that our
responsibility on this job is to look out for the future.
We have a young future scientist potential sitting out here
watching us this morning. I want to welcome her as well.
Mr. Chairman, I do appreciate the fact that you're having
this committee hearing from two committees because space
weather is not well understood but has the potential to impact
our daily lives in significant ways. It is a field that is ripe
for research and innovation to ensure that life and property
can be protected from the negative impacts of large-scale space
weather storms to which Texas is accustomed.
But also from the daily challenges posed by the space
weather events, the need for basic research is clear, as many
of the fundamental science and physics questions related to the
Sun-Earth system and space weather remain unanswered. I'm
pleased that the Chairman is holding this hearing today, as it
allows us to assess the current state of space weather research
and preparedness.
I look forward to today's discussion. I hope it will allow
us to move quickly to markup Mr. Perlmutter's Space Weather
Research and Forecasting Act and take it to the full House for
a vote. This bill is widely supported by the broad space
weather community, which includes federal agencies, academia,
and the commercial sector. Today's panels of expert witnesses
is well-suited to provide us with an update on the current
state of space weather research and development but also to
make clear the need for prompt passage of this legislation to
prevent backsliding on progress made today.
I am heartened to see that we have witnesses from NASA and
NOAA, the two lead federal agencies responsible for collecting
the data on modeling and forecasting space weather events to
the public to provide the Administration's perspective. Having
an academic and a representative from the commercial sector at
the table allows for a robust discussion not only on the state
of science in space weather but also about current research
needs moving forward. At this critical juncture, it is
important for Congress to continue the forward momentum for
what was set in motion by the National Space Weather Strategy
and the National Space Weather Action Plan in 2015.
Space weather research and prediction capabilities are
widely considered to be almost 50 years behind the state of
terrestrial weather prediction, leaving our society at a
disadvantage. Space weather impacts can be far-reaching, with
disturbances in the Sun-Earth system potentially leading to
disruption of key services such as GPS, the electric grid, and
airline communications to name a few.
Despite our current observing assets that are gathering
data on space weather phenomenon, we need to be thinking ahead
to the next round of needed observational capabilities to
ensure a continuation of critical data collection. We cannot
sit idly by and take our time to protect our critical
investments and society from the persistent damaging impacts of
space weather events. Based on the need for additional research
and collaboration and the clear and persistent threats posed by
space weather phenomenon on our daily lives, there is no better
time than now to put forth a legislative framework approach on
how this critical issue should be addressed.
I thank you, Mr. Chairman, and yield back.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Johnson follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairman Biggs. Thank you, Ms. Johnson. I appreciate that.
Now, we're going to introduce our wonderful witnesses on
this panel. Dr. Neil Jacobs is our first witness today. He is
the Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Environmental
Observation and Prediction at the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration. Prior to his appointment at NOAA,
Dr. Jacobs was the Chief Atmospheric Scientist at Panasonic
Avionics Corporation where he directed the research and
development of both the Aviation Weather Observing Program and
the Numerical Forecast Models. He is the Chair of the American
Meteorological Society's Forecast Improvement Group and also
served on the World Meteorological Organization's Aircraft-
Based Observing Systems Expert Team.
Dr. Jacobs holds bachelor of science degrees in mathematics
and physics from the University of South Carolina, a master of
science in air-sea interaction, and a doctoral degree in
numerical modeling from North Carolina State University.
Welcome, Dr. Jacobs.
Dr. James Spann is our next witness. He is the Chief
Scientist of the Heliophysics Division in the Science Mission
Directorate at NASA headquarters. In 1986, Dr. Spann joined the
NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Alabama,
where he has held numerous positions, including Chief Scientist
and Manager of the Science Research Office. He led the study
and publication of the Heliophysics Science and the Moon and
was Co-Chair of the Heliophysics Roadmap: The Solar and Space
Physics of a New Era. Dr. Spann was awarded the NASA
Outstanding Leadership Medal in 2010 and the NASA Distinguished
Service Medal in 2013.
He received his bachelor of science in mathematics and
physics from Ouachita Baptist University and his Ph.D. in
physics from the University of Arkansas in Fayetteville. He
also spent two years as a postdoctoral fellow with the U.S.
Department of Energy in Morgantown, West Virginia. Glad to have
you, Dr. Spann.
Dr. Sarah Gibson is our third witness, a Senior Scientist
in the High Altitude Observatory at the National Center for
Atmospheric Research and Co-Chair of the Committee on Solar and
Space Physics at the National Academy of Science. Dr. Gibson's
research centers on solar drivers of the terrestrial
environment from short-term space weather drivers such as
coronal mass ejections to long-term solar cycle variation. She
was the recipient of the American Astronomical Society's Solar
Physics Division 2005 Karen Harvey Prize. She was a scientific
editor for the Astrophysical Journal and has served on many
national and international committees.
Dr. Gibson received her bachelor's degree in physics from
Stanford University and her master and doctoral degrees in
astrophysics from the University of Colorado. Welcome, Dr.
Gibson.
Dr. Kent Tobiska is our final witness. He is President and
Chief Scientist of Space Environment Technologies. His career
spans work at the NOAA Space Environment Lab, U.S.--excuse me,
UC Berkeley Space Sciences Laboratory, Jet Propulsion
Laboratory, Northrop Grumman, SET, Utah State University Space
Weather Center, and Q-up LLC. Dr. Tobiska invented the world's
first operational computer code for solar irradiance
forecasting and extended this expertise into the development of
operational space weather systems that now produce solar
irradiances, geomagnetic indices, and ground-to-space radiation
environment dose rates.
Dr. Tobiska received a Ph.D. in aerospace engineering from
the University of Colorado. He is a member of the American
Geophysical Union, Committee on Space Research, American
Meteorological Society, and an associate fellow of the American
Institute of Aeronautics. We're happy to have you as well, Dr.
Tobiska.
Thank all of you.
And now, I recognize Dr. Jacobs for five minutes to present
his testimony, and I think the 5-minute timer's right there in
front of you so you can see it clearly. Thanks, Dr. Jacobs.
TESTIMONY OF DR. NEIL JACOBS,
ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF COMMERCE FOR
ENVIRONMENTAL OBSERVATION AND PREDICTION,
NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION
Dr. Jacobs. Good morning, Chairmen Biggs and Babin, Ranking
Members Bonamici and Bera, and Members of the Subcommittees.
Thank you for the opportunity to testify at this hearing about
space weather.
NOAA is the U.S. government's official source of civilian
space weather forecast, warning, and alerts to the public,
industry, and government agencies. Through our Space Weather
Production Center (SWPC), NOAA delivers space weather products
that meet the evolving needs of the nation. SWPC operates 24
hours a day, 7 days a week and provides real-time forecasts and
warnings of solar geophysical events. SWPC works closely with
our U.S. Air Force partners, who are responsible for all
national security needs and space weather information. SWPC
efforts are also closely integrated with other agencies
including NASA, National Science Foundation, and the U.S.
Geological Survey, as well as commercial service providers,
private industry, and academia.
NOAA utilizes an array of space- and ground-based
observations in our space weather forecast operations and
related research. Currently, NOAA relies on two primary
observational assets to underpin our forecasts and warning, one
satellite instrument for imagery of the Sun's corona and the
other for Earthbound solar wind. The solar imagery used by NOAA
comes from the joint European Space Agency/NASA's Solar and
Heliospheric Observatory, SOHO. SOHO's coronal imagery is
critical for NOAA's 1- to 4-day lead time for geomagnetic storm
conditions. SOHO is anticipated to run out of power by 2025,
and it currently has no backup.
In 2017, NOAA began development of a flight compact
coronagraph (CCOR) to obtain imagery, and we will work with the
U.S. Naval Research Laboratory to obtain the quickest possible
delivery of this instrument. NOAA is currently evaluating an
option to host the CCOR on our GOES-U satellite.
The second satellite NOAA uses is the Deep Space Climate
Observatory DSCOVR. Stationed at the Earth's Sun Lagrange point
L1 a million miles from Earth, DSCOVR is critical for real-time
measurements of Earthbound solar winds. These observations play
a critical role in our quest to better predict the probability
of an eruption of the Sun. When an eruption occurs, forecasters
feed the data into computer models and determine the likely
duration and intensity of the solar events of Earth's
ionosphere and magnetosphere.
NOAA forecasters communicate current and forecasted space
weather conditions using a variety of products. Space weather
scales, which are similar to hurricane classifications,
communicate potential impacts such as radio blackouts from
solar flares, solar radiation storms due to solar energetic
articles, and geomagnetic storms from coronal mass ejections.
Watches, warnings, and alerts are issued by email via a
product subscription service and also telephone notification to
critical customers such as power grid operators, FEMA, and DOD.
Using these NOAA products, the nation can enhance national
preparedness, mitigation, response, and recovery actions to
safeguard assets and maintain continuity of operations during
space weather activity.
SWPC ensures that all data are made available to the
growing private sector service providers. The NOAA private
sector partnership plays a vital role in meeting the nation's
needs for space weather services. NOAA makes all of its
information available and recognizes that a strong public-
private partnership is essential to establish observing
networks conduct the research, create forecast models, and
supply services necessary to support our national security and
economic prosperity. NOAA is committed to working towards the
growth of the private sector as a national infrastructure
demands more space weather services.
Space weather presents a variety of hazards to technical
systems and human health. NOAA's space weather products serve
major U.S. airlines, satellite companies, and all U.S. electric
power companies. These industries are well aware that solar
weather can impact their communications, navigation,
electrostatic charging, and cause mission interruption.
On April 19, the White House Office of Science and
Technology Policy announced a development and update to the
National Space Weather Strategy. This strategy, originally
published in October of 2015, sets out to unite the U.S.
national and homeland security with science and technology
enterprise to formulate a cohesive approach to enhance national
preparedness for space weather. This important update seeks to
improve the government coordination on long-term guidance for
federal programs and activities to enhance national
preparedness for space weather events.
The revised strategy will align with priorities identified
by the Administration in the 2017 National Security Strategy
and Space Policy Directive 1. NOAA will continue to work and
partner with other federal agencies in this renewed effort to
develop and strengthen our activities in space. NOAA recognizes
the importance of engaging public and private expertise and the
whole-community collaborative approach to enhance the
resiliency and security of our nation to space weather storms.
Thank you again for inviting me to participate today. I
would be pleased to answer any questions you may have.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Jacobs follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairman Biggs. Thank you, Dr. Jacobs.
I now recognize Dr. Spann for five minutes for his
testimony.
TESTIMONY OF DR. JIM SPANN,
CHIEF SCIENTIST, HELIOPHYSICS DIVISION,
SCIENCE MISSION DIRECTORATE,
NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION
Dr. Spann. Thank you. Members of the Subcommittee, as the
Heliophysics Chief Scientist for NASA's Science Mission
Directorate, I am honored to appear before this Committee to
discuss NASA's contribution to understanding space weather
phenomenon.
Space weather is complex, involving intricate interactions
between the Sun, solar wind, Earth's magnetic field, and
Earth's atmosphere. NASA serves as a research organization for
our nation's space weather efforts, working with the National
Science Foundation to understand space weather. Together, we
help operational organizations, NOAA, and the Department of
Defense incorporate that understanding into operational models
and space weather predictions to better prepare the nation for
potential impacts.
Our ability to understand the Sun-Earth system is of
growing importance to our nation's economy, national security,
and our society as it increasingly depends on technology. While
the Sun enables and sustains life here on Earth, it produces
radiation and magnetic energy that can have disruptive impacts
in space, in air, and on the ground.
Understanding the Sun-Earth system has practical
implications for life on Earth. For example, the electric power
industry is susceptible to geomagnetically induced currents,
which can, without advanced warning, overload unprotected power
grids and result in widespread power outages. In the spacecraft
industry, intense geomagnetic and radiation storms have the
capacity to disrupt normal operations such as satellite
communication and television service. Space weather can cause
irregularities in signals from GPS satellites, which can
adversely affect our warfighters, first responders, truckers,
oil drillers, large-scale farmers, and outdoor enthusiasts,
pretty much everybody. Finally, the aviation industry is
particularly susceptible to space weather events from both an
operational and crew/passenger safety perspective.
NASA's heliophysics missions all contribute to
understanding the physical processes that drive space weather.
With locations throughout the solar system, we observe the Sun-
Earth system every day using NASA's Heliophysics Systems
Observatory with 18 active missions comprised of 28 spacecraft.
At NASA, we're extremely excited to see how our new missions
will revolutionize our understanding of the Sun-Earth system
and space weather.
The recently launched GOLD mission and an upcoming ICON
mission will improve our understanding of what is happening in
the ionosphere, the region in the near-Earth space where
significant space weather impacts occur. This summer, we'll
spend a spacecraft, Parker Solar Probe, closer to the Sun than
ever before and dive into the Sun's hot corona to provide the
closest ever observations. She will reveal the fundamental
science behind what drives the solar wind, which is the
constant outpouring of material from the Sun, and improve
forecasts of major eruptions on the Sun, all of which affect
space weather near the Earth.
NASA's Heliophysics Division is in the process of selecting
its next strategic mission, the Decadal Survey priority IMAP.
This mission will observe the boundary of our solar system and
investigate acceleration processes critical to understanding
space weather. As you've heard, NASA and NOAA are exploring a
potential partnership to share IMAP's launch vehicle with
NOAA's space weather follow-on mission. These new missions will
join our existing fleet to enhance the already vibrant
Heliophysics Systems Observatory.
NASA supports world-class research based on data from these
missions in order to understand the connections within our Sun-
Earth system for science advancement and human safety both on
Earth and beyond. This field of research is called heliophysics
and provides the foundation upon which predictive models of
space weather are built. To help mitigate space weather hazards
posed to assets both in space and on the ground, NASA continues
to develop and improve predictive models through enhanced
fundamental understanding of space weather by funding competed
basic research opportunities, which includes topics such as
solar variability and ionosphere irregularities.
NASA, in coordination with NOAA and NSF, has developed a
cross-agency plan to enhance the transition of research models
to operations. NASA has a pilot program to improve space
weather products and services for research to operations which
will draw on expertise in academia and in industry both in
technology and knowledge. This program utilizes the established
NASA Community Coordinated Modeling Center, a successful
multiagency partnership that provides space science simulations
to the research community and support our sister agencies by
transitioning space research models to operations.
NASA appreciates the continued support from this committee,
which ensures that the United States maintains a superior
position in understanding space weather and looks forward to
the continued collaboration with our sister agencies,
international partners, academia, and industry.
NASA heliophysics has a big year in front of it. The data
we receive from upcoming missions and from the existing
Heliophysics Systems Observatory will vastly improve our
understanding of this challenging phenomenon and enable
improved predictive space weather models. Heliophysics research
is intrinsically the science of space weather, and NASA is
committed to remain the leader in that research.
So I thank you now for the invitation to be here today, and
I look forward to answering any questions that you may have.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Spann follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairman Biggs. Thank you, Dr. Spann.
I now recognize Dr. Gibson for five minutes for her
testimony.
TESTIMONY OF DR. SARAH GIBSON,
SENIOR SCIENTIST, HIGH ALTITUDE OBSERVATORY,
NATIONAL CENTER FOR ATMOSPHERIC
RESEARCH AND CO-CHAIR,
COMMITTEE ON SOLAR AND SPACE PHYSICS,
NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCE
Dr. Gibson. Thank you very much.
My intent is to provide context for your discussion of
space weather and to argue for moving forward with legislation
as soon as possible.
In brief, the points that I wish to convey today are as
follows: First of all, space weather has broad and potentially
devastating impacts on the nation; second, there are
fundamental scientific questions that are central to space
weather that remain unanswered; third, space weather research
and operations are observationally starved; fourth, the path
forward requires strategic actions that emphasize both
efficiency and agility; and finally, space weather legislation
is needed now.
First of all, space weather happens all of the time. We're
living in the outer atmosphere of our Sun, which is
continuously expanding outwards as the solar wind and passing
the Earth as an unceasing stream of charged particles. On a
regular basis, dense, fast, and strongly magnetized particles
are buffeting the Earth and breaking through its magnetic
shield.
In the past, this would just mean that we would see
auroras, but now, technology has made us vulnerable. As you've
heard, geomagnetic activity induces ground currents and impacts
power grids. Perturbations of the upper atmosphere disrupt GPS,
radiocommunication, and increase the risk of collisions for the
International Space Station and for satellites in low-Earth
orbit. Radiation storms knock out satellite function, increase
the exposure of airplane passenger and crew on polar routes,
and are particularly dangerous for our astronauts as they
venture forth to the moon and Mars.
Space weather has the potential to be really bad. The
Carrington event of 1859 was so big it led to auroras as far
south as Cuba and sparked fires along telegraph lines. It's
been estimated that a modern superstorm of this size would cost
tens of billions of dollars per day, potentially reaching
totals in the trillions of dollars from extended power outages
and global supply chain disruptions.
Even when it's not a superstorm, space weather is a
problem. Analysis of insurance claims associated with power
grid disruptions estimated costs on the order of $10 billion
per year for the United States for non-extreme events, and even
moderate space weather increases risk for serious hazards, as I
have described.
So what do we know? Well, we know that space weather comes
from the Sun. Solar flares have an almost immediate effect at
the Earth, and then mass and magnetic fields are hurled out
into the solar wind, hitting the Earth a day or two later. The
devil is in the details. We don't know what triggers the solar
eruption. We don't know how things change from Sun to Earth,
and we don't know what exactly to expect when it gets here.
There is still much to learn about the fundamental physical
processes and the complex interactions from Sun to Earth.
Our best bet for filling the gaps in our understanding are
more observations. For tackling basic science problems, this
includes higher-quality observations, as well as new types of
observations and from new viewpoints. For operational forecasts
and monitoring, the requirements are different. There the
emphasis is on observations we can analyze quickly and that are
consistent and reliable.
The legislation, as presented in the Senate and proposed
House bills, provide a good framework for progress. The bills
enable research, for example, through multidisciplinary science
centers to solve the fundamental problems that will then lead
to better forecasting capability. They extend our observational
assets, both for filling the science gaps and to protect our
baseline for operations. They also lay out the roles and the
responsibility for the different government agencies, which
leads to more efficient use of national resources and to better
protection of our nation.
They promote further efficiency through seeking leveraging
opportunities from outside the government, including the
international, the commercial, and the academic sectors. An
example of this: our prime operational research, the LASCO
Coronagraph is on the SOHO satellite, which is a collaboration
of NASA and the European Space Agency. Another example, the
NASA GOLD mission, was launched on a commercial communications
satellite.
And finally, the proposed legislation promotes an agile and
necessarily open-ended approach to capitalizing on innovations
from and interactions with these nongovernmental groups.
In summary, we are an increasingly technological society,
and we cannot afford to ignore space weather. If we delay
action, we run multiple risks. We run the risk of being
unprepared for a superstorm. We run the risk of failure of our
operational assets. LASCO is 23 years old, and that would
degrade even our current forecasting capability. And then
there's the costs and the risks associated with even moderate
space weather. Every day we wait, we waste time and money and
we roll the dice on our safety.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Gibson follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairman Biggs. Thank you, Dr. Gibson.
I now recognize Dr. Tobiska for five minutes for his
testimony.
TESTIMONY OF DR. W. KENT TOBISKA,
PRESIDENT AND CHIEF SCIENTIST,
SPACE ENVIRONMENT TECHNOLOGIES
Dr. Tobiska. Good morning, Chairman Biggs and Babin,
Ranking and Committee Members. I'm pleased to testify on the
commercial perspective on impacts, monitoring, and forecasting
of space weather as President of Space Environment Technologies
and also as an Executive Committee member of the American
Commercial Space Weather Association.
As you've heard, space weather occurs because energy
transfers from the Sun to Earth, causing sudden changes in
ground currents, atmospheric radiation, ionosphere, and upper
atmosphere densities. From our experience, for example, the
power grid is susceptible. As you know, the 1989 Hydro-Quebec
power collapse, because of a geomagnetic storm, left 9 million
customers without power, and imagine the entire Northeastern
sector of the United States without power because of a
Carrington-class geomagnetic storm. Predicting this without
data and observations is impossible.
A common index identifying storm severity is Dst and, in
2011, a company developed the first operational six-day Dst
forecast for Air Force Space Command. Now, it is publicly
available and used to help estimate coming geomagnetic
disturbances.
Turning to radiation, pilots, flight attendants, and
frequent flyers can receive excessive dose. Galactic cosmic
rays are the main cause, although a solar flare can triple it.
Increased exposure leads to greater statistical risk of death
from deep-tissue cancer. There's a handy rule of thumb: Every
10 hours at 37,000 feet equals a chest x-ray, and that is one
round-trip between DC. and L.A. Until recently, there was no
monitoring, so a company started the ARMAS program in 2013 to
measure dose on aircraft and immediately send it to the ground
for public use.
Next, ionosphere disruptions can lead to lost high-
frequency radio signals, as you know. Nine days after Hurricane
Katrina, as helicopters lifted people off of rooftops, the
fourth largest flare in history occurred. It caused blackouts,
affecting disaster recovery HF radio communications. Those are
used because Katrina wiped out the telecommunications
infrastructure. Coast Guard recovery ships couldn't even
communicate with the helicopters. Learning from this event, we
saw that no credible HF availability forecast existed, thus,
companies worked with Utah State University to develop and
distribute a free HF radio 24-hour global forecast.
Finally, from large flares and geomagnetic storms, upper
atmosphere density increases, affecting satellite orbits. Now,
in 1990, NORAD lost 200 satellites during one storm from its
catalog. Based on that experience, Space Command launched a
major effort to improve their upper atmosphere forecasts.
Within ten years, the HASDM system was deployed, and after 15
years, a new upper atmosphere density model was released. That
model was the single largest improvement in upper atmosphere
density uncertainties since the 1960s. Companies were the key
participants with Space Command to build that model, and now,
the solar geomagnetic activities created cut atmospheric
density uncertainties in half.
I use these examples to emphasize that real-time data and
observations are vitally important for space weather
monitoring. Monitoring cannot succeed until we produce a volume
of data that is larger than is currently done by the--all
agencies combined. To improve prediction, the use of physics-
based data assimilation and ensemble models is our future. The
main problem is forecasting the arrival of coronal ejected
materials at Earth and knowing the magnitude of its effect.
Every important risk management activity depends on solving
this problem, and operational data from commercial space
weather is a critical part of the solution.
Mr. Chairman, Ranking Members, and Committee Members, thank
you for this opportunity to testify, and I welcome any
questions.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Tobiska follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairman Biggs. Thank you, Dr. Tobiska.
I now recognize myself for five minutes for questions. And
before I do so, I just want to make two quick points. Number
one, I am in the similar boat as Chairman Lamar Smith as I
serve on the Judiciary Committee, and so I will be in and out
the balance of this hearing, running down those stairs and back
up, which apparently is a better use of my transportation mode
than the weekly round-trip from here to Phoenix that I take,
so--which makes me very nervous.
Dr. Jacobs, the Department of Commerce recently sent out a
request for information seeking public comments on federal
space weather policy. Among other things, the RFI seeks input
on ways to advance engagement with the private sector in this
effort. Can you please give us an idea of how the private
sector might enhance the National Space Weather Strategy?
Dr. Jacobs. What we're interested in learning from that is
if they have any capabilities, either ground-based, Sun-facing
or space-based Sun-facing observing capabilities that could
enhance our mission or possibly even forecasting technologies
or capabilities.
Chairman Biggs. Thank you. And, Dr. Tobiska, can you tell
me--please tell the Committee how space environment
technologies can aid the federal government in improving its
National Space Weather Strategy.
Dr. Tobiska. In particular, the commercial sector first of
all sees that it is in partnership with the agencies and
academia in helping build this enterprise. The commercial
sector has evolved over the last 15 to 20 years, and
specifically, there's examples of what the commercial sector
can do right now. In the ionosphere for the assimilation side
of it, there are companies that are producing high-quality
gold-standard simulation monitors that can be used by NOAA for
that capability.
For the aircraft radiation environment, companies are
building monitoring devices for use on aircraft. In fact, we
learn from the tropospheric weather community how to send that
data down to the ground via an iridium satellite in real time.
There's a lot of good NASA, NOAA, NSF, and FAA research
aircraft that are flying those instruments right now, and then
even the commercial space transportation sector is starting to
buy those kinds of dosimeters.
So the bottom line is that the commercial sector has a lot
of capability for instrumentation, for some data production.
There's colleagues in the audience here who produce solar
energetic particle forecasts, and those kind of activities can
actually be transitioned into products and services useful for
the agencies so----
Chairman Biggs. Thank you. And, Dr. Tobiska, can you
briefly provide some examples of ways the federal government
can improve its coordination with companies like yours? And
then I'll ask Dr. Jacobs and Dr. Spann and Dr. Gibson the same
question.
Dr. Tobiska. Sure. That's an excellent question, and I
really appreciate you asking it. That was actually a big topic
in the sidebar meetings last week at the Space Weather Workshop
that was hosted by NOAA and other agencies in Boulder. In
particular, the big tentpole that exists right now for this
collaboration is not having a common table to sit at, not
having a process in place. Over the years, there has been
friction between companies and agencies. It's because in
agencies there's researchers, which are good, and they're very
enthusiastic about doing activities, but sometimes they don't
know what's going on in the commercial sector. And so there's
been a competition at different times in the past.
However, I think across the board on the commercial sector
we see it extremely important and very possible that the
commercial and the academic and the agency guys sit down at
some kind of a process rather than we're all being in a
swimming pool right now splashing each other. If we could
determine a process to determine our swim lanes, that would
really help I think ease any friction in the future and enable
us to best use our resources where we're having expertise in
each area.
Chairman Biggs. Dr. Jacobs, do you concur? Do you want to
expand on that?
Dr. Jacobs. Yes, I do. This is one of the reasons why we
released the RFI was because it's hard for us to sort of define
swim lanes if we don't know what the other swimmers are doing.
So it's of interest to us to learn what's going on in the
commercial sector so there's no duplicative efforts in
development and also any capabilities that they may have to
help us transition research to operational forecasting faster.
Chairman Biggs. Regrettably, my time is expired.
And now, I'm going to recognize the gentleman from
Colorado, Mr. Perlmutter, for five minutes for his questions.
Mr. Perlmutter. Thanks, Mr. Chairman. And again, thank you
to the panel. This is an excellent discussion.
I've had the chance, and a number of others on this
committee, we visited the High Altitude Observatory at Atacama,
so the ALMA radio telescopes, and 66 of those telescopes were
trained on the Sun as part of observations again through the
National Science Foundation. I've had a chance to go to the
NOAA lab where the Space Weather Prediction Center is, helping
both the Department of Defense, as well as commercial, you
know, civilian operations.
And we've got a good system going, but to Dr. Tobiska's
point--and I think the purpose of the legislation--is to
provide some parameters and some guidelines as to how the
commercial, the international, academic, and agency communities
work together to avoid, you know, some big problems or at least
to know more.
So, Dr. Gibson, let me start with you. You went through
about five points as to the importance of understanding space
weather. So talk to me--and other members of the panel can jump
in--as to what we in Congress can do for all of you to help you
understand space weather and its potentialities on the Earth.
Dr. Gibson. Okay. So, I mean, first and foremost, we need
to learn more about these fundamental problems that we don't
understand because that's how we're going to do better in our
forecasting. And Dr. Tobiska mentioned, for example, the
importance of knowing the structure of the coronal mass
ejection, knowing what the magnetic fields are when they hit
the Earth. That's something which is absolutely key to being
able to make progress. And that's something which requires
better observations of the magnetic fields back at the Sun,
better observations of the coronal mass ejection as it moves
from Sun to Earth, and better observations of the Earth's
magnetic field, the space environment, and atmosphere. And so
all these observations are needed.
And then we have to bring together the modelers, the
theorists, the data scientists who can help us figure out how
to improve our understanding and our forecasting using these
observations. And so I think that's the first and foremost
thing that has to happen.
Mr. Perlmutter. Dr. Spann?
Dr. Spann. Yes, I think I'd concur that having the
observations that are fundamental to increase our understanding
are critical. And, as I mentioned in my opening statement, we
have several missions that not only are doing that now that are
coming online to do exactly that where we're studding
acceleration processes, we're--both right near the Sun with
Parker Probe or with the new IMAP mission, which is focused on
not only looking at the boundary of the solar system but also
looking at acceleration processes perhaps a little bit closer
to the Earth. And then with ICON and GOLD really studying where
the rubber meets the road in terms of the impacts of much of
our technologies and assets which are in the near Earth
environment.
And so as we pursue the decadal priorities in terms of
these missions, while we are focused on the fundamental
understanding, there is always this aspect that there's an
applied component that--where we can work with our sister
agencies and academia and industry. Quite frankly, we rely so
heavily on academia and industry in terms of providing that
knowledge base to really understand these missions.
And so with NASA continuing the strategy with these
missions that are ongoing and the ones that are a little bit
further out is the way we believe is going to provide the best
foundation so that we can have better predictions for space
weather.
Mr. Perlmutter. All right. So to Drs. Tobiska and Jacobs,
are there forums or conferences--is there really--is there any
structure or is it really just a swimming pool, you know, and
you're not in each other's lanes? What kinds of things are out
there to allow the international community, industry, academia,
and the agencies to work together in sync and not sort of at
cross purposes?
Dr. Tobiska. I'll take a first stab at that. The--first of
all, that's directly on point. I think if you hadn't been a
space weather week last week, you certainly would have had a
good contribution. The--in particular, the American
Meteorological Society is a professional society that has acted
as a neutral third-party arbitrator to some extent in maybe a
decade or 15 years ago when the commercial weather and NOAA
were having issues trying to resolve which swim lanes they were
in. As a community, the commercial guys, the academic guys, and
the agency folks really do think the AMS can provide that role,
and they've actually indicated that they would be interested in
that in the future.
So of course there's other meetings and conferences of
opportunity, but I would say if there's a neutral third party
that would really help organize a table or process for
discussion, perhaps some agencies can also help that.
Mr. Perlmutter. Thank you, Doctor.
Dr. Jacobs, my time has expired, so I would, if I could,
like to introduce into the record, Mr. Chairman, a number of
letters that we have received from the American Astronomical
Society; the American Commercial Space Weather Association; the
American Geophysical Union; Carmel Research Center; Penn State
University; University of Colorado; University of Michigan;
University of New Hampshire; and the University Corporation for
Atmospheric Research, UCAR. And I ask unanimous consent to
enter those.
And just as a parting comment, the purpose of the
legislation we're bringing is to help everybody get into those
lanes to make the predictions and observations to avoid a lot
of pain that might come from some eruption or another. Thank
you.
Mr. Babin. [Presiding] And without objection, those will be
entered into the record. Thank you.
[The information follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Babin. And in the absence of Chairman Biggs, I'm the
Chairman of the Space Subcommittee and will preside until he
returns. And I'd like to recognize myself for five minutes for
questions.
During the recent 2018 Space Weather Workshop in Colorado,
several presentations alluded to the private and academic
opportunities within the overall space weather enterprise.
These opportunities include the Space Weather Technology
Research and Education Center at the University of Colorado in
Boulder. Amen. And the possible use of future OneWeb commercial
satellites as polar orbit environmental sensors. What other
opportunities, especially in forecasting and prediction
analytics, are available for the private and academic sectors
to help NOAA, the Air Force, and NASA to accomplish space
weather goals? Dr. Jacobs, I'd like to direct that to you
first.
Dr. Jacobs. The two primary things would be observations
and forecasting. So we need observations both to initialize the
predictions, as well is to verify the forecasts. So it's
impossible to improve a forecast unless you have observations
for verification.
The current state of the forecasting is we essentially see
an event occurring on the Sun and then we can predict how that
will impact the Earth, but there's really no way to predict
when these events will occur other than some weak probabilistic
guidance, and that I think is where the future of the research
needs to focus is actually predicting the onset of these
events, not what happens once they occur.
Mr. Babin. All right. Thank you very much.
And Dr. Spann, could you elaborate on that?
Dr. Spann. Yes. I think that understanding and being able
to predict these events is really tied to the fundamental
understanding of what's going on. And as we all try to identify
our swim lanes--and I'd like to take that analogy a little
further--I think where we want to go is actually synchronized
swimming. And so--but right now, we are identifying our swim
lanes and understanding what roles each agency plays, and for
NASA that is really providing the fundamental understanding.
And as we not only launch these new missions, which are really
targeted, we also have a new space weather application--science
application program that we're rolling out, which will allow
competed opportunities very specifically tied toward
transitioning the science research to an operational scenario,
and that will certainly engage the academic and industry very
heavily. And so those are the two areas where I would say--
where we can get to the synchronized swimming scenario.
Mr. Babin. Well, we were just talking about Esther Williams
and--so that's a good analogy. And would either of the other
two, Dr. Gibson or Dr. Tobiska, would you like to elaborate on
that if you would?
Dr. Gibson. Sure, yes. I would just comment that there's
different kinds of observations that are needed, right? I mean,
there's the observations we need to make progress in the
fundamental science, and this is the real cutting-edge new big
telescopes. New measurements, and from different vantages. One
of the exciting opportunities is to take observations from a
place in the Sun's orbit where you can look back and see a CME
moving from the Sun to the Earth. And this is something that
the European Space Agency may actually take on and be an
incredible complementary asset to our observations, which are
looking right along the Sun-Earth line.
You take that a little farther and you could observe from
above the Sun's poles looking down, and you would get that same
operational benefit of seeing eruptions go from the Sun to the
Earth directed at the Earth, and yet you'd get other scientific
benefits as well.
So there's exciting opportunities for moving forward in the
fundamental research, and then there's other observations we
need to basically have the best possible operational
capabilities. And some of these are the ones we know about like
the LASCO Coronagraph and the observations of the solar wind
just upstream of the Earth. And these we have to maintain so we
can keep doing as well as we are now, but there may be new
operational assets that, as we move forward in the fundamental
science, we identify as observations that can make us actually
do better in terms of the operations.
And then finally, the other kind of observations that we
need in the benchmarking activity, are related to applied
science goals. In the benchmarking activity, one of the things
they tried to study was the geomagnetic activity and the ground
currents, how extreme they could get. To do that, they needed
magnetometers on the ground and also magnetotelluric surveys
which tell you about the ground conductivity. And they found
that only about half of the United States was really covered by
these observations, and this represents another gap that we
need. So we just keep finding new things that we need to
observe.
Mr. Babin. Yes, thank you. And Dr. Tobiska?
Dr. Tobiska. Yes, just one or two comments. I would really
like to echo my other colleagues who emphasized the
observations needed of the material coming from the Sun to the
Earth. Right now, we are really at the point like the
tropospheric weather community was 50 years ago. We're just a
half-dozen cities making temperature measurements. We can't
predict when the snow is going to come over the mountain unless
we look out the window.
Now, we need to have the thousands and tens of thousands of
measurements in that realm. They don't exist yet. Plus there's
other measurements downstream for other technologies, but if we
could solve that viewing of what's coming at us from the Sun,
knowing the velocity and the directionality of it to get the
magnitude, that would be a big deal.
Mr. Babin. Right. Thank you. And I have about five other
questions, but I'm out of time. A lot of them are--I really
would like to hear some answers on, especially in regards to
national security issues.
But I would like to recognize Dr. Bera, the gentleman from
California, for his five minutes.
Mr. Bera. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. As I said in my opening
statement, these are fascinating hearings about science. And,
you know, for those viewers at home I think it's important--you
know, often people say, well, why is Congress talking about
space weather? But, you know, I think Dr. Gibson in your
opening statement--I think each of you talk about how these
space phenomenon and solar phenomenon can impact every aspect
of our lives.
You talked about the electrical grid, you talked about our
GPS and navigational systems, and, you know, often the public
may just think, you know, GPS is, you know, what I've got on my
phone and it helps me get from point A to point B, and if it
goes down, well, what's the big deal? I might have an old
Thomas Guide in my glove box that I can open up and look in.
But Dr. Gibson, maybe if you want to just expand--I mean,
if we're thinking about the future and we're going to have
autonomous vehicles, we're going to have, you know, autonomous
trucks, that's all going to be reliant on GPS navigational
systems. And if you just want to talk about the impact if GPS
was knocked down.
Dr. Gibson. Yes, absolutely. And I think there's a whole
continuum there, right? I mean, there's the degrading of GPS
where it introduces errors, which can be very significant,
maybe not for us if there's a little glitch when we're getting
directions, maybe it's not that big of a deal, but for doing
mineral surveys or--there's many, many applications where the
precision is critical. And then if there's a big event, there's
the potential for a true loss, and that's something which hits
so many different aspects of peoples in society today.
Mr. Bera. So it's incredibly important for us to better
understand this phenomenon as we become increasingly reliant on
these new technologies and so forth.
Dr. Spann, you touched on the Parker Solar Probe and, you
know, if you could just expand on what the solar probe would
allow us to learn and why--you know, it'll go closer to the Sun
than I think anything we've ever sent, and if it will help us,
you know, with predictable capabilities and what kind of
science we're going to learn from----
Dr. Spann. So Parker Solar Probe is scheduled to be
launched, and the window of opportunity opens up at the end of
July through August, and that is really focused on two areas.
One is trying to understand the acceleration processes. As much
as we observe the solar wind, which are the particles emanating
from the Sun, we don't understand how they get up to the speeds
they get up to. And so a lot of that acceleration process
happens very, very close to the Sun, and we've remotely
observed the Sun but never really actually gone and touched the
Sun, and so Parker is going to be our first opportunity to do
that, an incredible technology advance.
So understanding that acceleration process and then also
just understanding just kind of fundamentally, you know, parts
of the solar atmosphere are hotter even than the surface of the
Sun, and we just don't understand that. And so what's going on
there? All of that provides us the fundamental understanding
about how the Sun works and how it impacts our Earth system,
and so Parker is going to provide a significant advancement in
those areas.
Mr. Bera. Yes, Dr. Gibson, if I--I'll come back to you. You
know, we obviously can try to better understand solar
phenomenon and solar flares and things that potentially disrupt
and cause space weather. Are there protective things that we
can do, you know, here on Earth, you know, understanding that
we can't control it, but if we get better at predicting it, you
know, what would the things that we might do to protect some of
our systems and, you know--or build redundancy?
Dr. Gibson. Absolutely. So, I mean, there's a range of
things. If we know what's going to happen, for example, the
power company can operate in modes that will avoid catastrophic
failure, but--and the airlines can potentially change the
altitude of their flights. There's various things that can be
done. The problem is it's expensive to make these mitigations,
and it's critical that we don't give false positives. We have
to do better in our forecasting so that they can be taken
seriously. And then also we can make use of the benchmarking
activity to try to get a sense just how bad things can get can
help us harden our assets so that we can prepare for the worst.
Mr. Bera. Okay. Great. And I'm about out of time, but as a
Member who represents California who also happens to be a
physician, Dr. Tobiska, maybe I should get a lead-lined jacket
or something for these flights. So thank you, and with that, I
will yield back.
Mr. Babin. Thank you. I appreciate it, Dr. Bera.
And now the gentleman from California, Mr. Rohrabacher.
Mr. Rohrabacher. I appreciate this hearing, and I
appreciate the guidance that you're trying to give us right
now.
How does space weather and a space weather storm--how does
that compare to an EMP attack, for example, in terms of the
danger that we face? Maybe just start at that end and go to
that end.
Dr. Tobiska. That's an excellent question, and I know that
there's been a community. I think the NRC has actually looked
at that. In general, the severity of an EMP attack against the
United States compared to a Carrington-class event are in the
same order of magnitude. If we were to have a Carrington-class
event in the United States today that affected, say, the
Northeast of the United States, you could potentially have, you
know, days to weeks to months of power outages.
And the problem is is that the big transformers that
distribute the power grid, when they're hit by this induced
current and they blow out, there are not transformers sitting
on the shelf to replace them. If each one of these things--the
big ones are custom-built. I'm not talking about the telephone
pole ones. So building those takes months to do, and they're
not sitting around, so that's the problem.
Mr. Rohrabacher. So a space weather storm could give us
that same impact that we've been warned about with EMP. What
could--for example, could some space weather storm impact on us
to the point that people might wake up one day and not be able
to use any of their credit cards or use their cell phone or
things like that?
Dr. Spann. Yes. I think that because we--I mean, just think
of in the morning you plug in everything, you know, to an
outlet or whatever, so that--you know, anything that requires
an outlet now is going to be a problem. And so it does impact a
lot of things, all of--you know, we're just so technologically
dependent not only on the ground but in space for our
communications, so it would, you know should such an event
occur, it would impact----
Mr. Rohrabacher. GPS?
Dr. Spann. Yes.
Mr. Rohrabacher. Our GPS----
Dr. Spann. Yes.
Mr. Rohrabacher. --system could go down?
Dr. Spann. Yes. And I would even make a point that, you
know, it doesn't take a huge event like that for things to
become impactful to us, even with the errors in GPS, even
without an EMP or without a major solar storm, just the
irregularities in the ionosphere cause issues with
communications and GPS signals. And so it was mentioned that
space weather happens all the time, and yes, it's punctuated
with major storms, but we kind of live through it all the time.
Mr. Rohrabacher. So we're pretty well--not pretty well but
we have a certain degree of protection based on our own
atmosphere and--that's around the Earth but--so this means that
as we go beyond the atmospheres, especially with satellites,
and also deep space missions that this subcommittee oversees,
that this is a major--has to be a major consideration if we're
expect to have a successful mission beyond that Earth
atmosphere?
Dr. Spann. Yes. And I think the--if I could speak to the
deep space aspect, there are really two issues that we can talk
about space weather. One is a very strong variability that's
driven by the Sun and what's going on, but then there's a
constant background radiation is primarily due to the galactic
cosmic rays. And this is a place where I think industry can
come in and have a major role.
That background radiation, while it may be low-level,
that's actually the biggest concern at least for astronauts and
humans out in deep space. And so understanding how to protect
ourselves and shield ourselves from that, we don't have a good
solution for that, and I think this is a place where we could
put some emphasis as well.
Mr. Rohrabacher. Yes. I have always been surprised at the
dangers that the world faces that nobody even knows about or
cares about, and I've often in this committee tried to draw our
attention to the fact that an asteroid could actually be
discovered that might hit the Earth that we should be prepared
for it. And I think that what we're talking about today is of
that magnitude that we need to be aware that this would be an
earthshattering--there are potential earthshattering events
when it comes to this space weather storms and also the things
that we've been talking about.
So thank you, Mr. Chairman, for your leadership in both the
Subcommittees, and let's work together to try to--it's our job
to make sure we work on things that can bring down the damage
that would be done on one of these natural threats. Thank you
very much.
Mr. Babin. Yes, sir. Thank you, Mr. Rohrabacher.
Now, I'd like to recognize the gentlelady from Oregon, Ms.
Bonamici.
Ms. Bonamici. Thank you very much to Chairman Babin,
Chairman Biggs, Ranking Member Bera, and thank you to our
witnesses.
I apologize I wasn't here during your testimony. I had a
conflict with another hearing. But this is a fascinating and
important topic, and I'm trying to figure out who's going to be
the first person to use synchronized swimming and swarm task
force in the same sentence.
But to each witness, in northwest Oregon and in fact around
the country it's essential that our constituents have access to
accurate warnings about extreme weather events ahead of time to
help vulnerable residents prepare. And last Congress this
committee passed--in fact the House passed and the President
signed into law bipartisan legislation I worked on with then
Representative Bridenstine, now NASA Administrator Bridenstine,
to strengthen terrestrial weather forecasting. But unlike
terrestrial weather events, space weather has a broader
potential to affect our entire planet. The Sun of course and
its constant activity present so many risks for significant
space weather events, as you have discussed.
Unfortunately, we are decades there, as Dr. Tobiska points
out, 50 years behind with the forecast capability of
terrestrial weather predictions and are not yet able to prepare
ourselves fully before an event occurs. And I know you have
described both in your responses and in your testimony the
implications of inaction and not moving forward with developing
a more robust forecasting capability. And I want to acknowledge
the progress, however, that's been made to date.
So I want to ask what data gaps need to be addressed in our
current space weather observing infrastructure that would help
us better prepare against these threats, and also if you could
let us know whether there is additional technology that needs
development or is there sufficient technology if we could get
the policy through updating? Go ahead, whoever wants to start,
and then I do have another question. So, Dr. Spann?
Dr. Spann. Well, I was just going to mention that just from
a fundamental perspective really advancing our models based on
the data input and the theories that our folks out in the
academia and the industry are providing, that I think provides
that foundational--and I'll let others speak to kind of how you
implement that, but that is where I see us focusing on. I think
we've talked about very large missions but also having
distribute missions within the ionosphere with many, many small
satellites and other very fascinating things, which again the
academia and industry can partner very heavily with government
to do that.
Dr. Tobiska. Yes, I would just add a comment on this. The
academic community, some in industry and certainly in the
agencies have really begun to take on the lessons from the
terrestrial weather community. Fifty years ago, they had the
big physics-based models but not much data, so the forecasts
weren't very good. Now, our forecasts are really pretty good
but they have a lot of data coming in, so it's like knowing the
answer--it's like cheating on the exam. You know what's coming
at you, but that data assimilation in the physics-based models
is critical. And then having several models run simultaneously
in ensemble modeling like they do for the hurricane tracks--you
have a whole bunch of models that you can see where they're
coming--those--the combination of those two kinds of modeling
with the data being ingested into them would really make a
significant difference. I think the community as a whole really
sees that as a path forward, but certainly, as colleagues have
said, observations are really critical to feeding that.
Ms. Bonamici. Terrific. We also had some good discussions
in this Committee about the social sciences of message
communication, which I think will be critical as well here. Dr.
Gibson, can you talk about what the disadvantages or advantages
of coordinating or streamlining both nationally and
internationally with our efforts to gather space weather data?
Is there potential for overlap or redundancy between agencies
if there's not a direction on how to proceed?
Dr. Gibson. There's definitely efficiencies of bringing
together so that we're all working towards the same goal with
our synchronized swimming. You know, there's also a huge
benefit from sharing data between agencies, and, you know, the
benchmarking activity is a great example of how having
everybody bring their expertise and their knowledge to the
table so we can really make progress.
There was a release of data recently I think from the DOD
that was part of the executive order which was satellite data
of space weather from the DOD and which both introduces
important new observations into the scientific analysis of
space weather and also provides an opportunity for the DOD to
get research done in the direction where they would really care
about.
Ms. Bonamici. And real quickly, how are we doing with
international collaboration?
Dr. Gibson. Fabulous. And this L5 collaboration
particularly, which would be the Sun-Earth view from the side,
is a wonderful opportunity.
Ms. Bonamici. Thank you. I see my time is expired. I yield
back. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Babin. Sorry about that. Thank you very much, Ms.
Bonamici.
I'd like to recognize the gentleman from Alabama, Mr.
Brooks, now for five minutes of questions.
Mr. Brooks. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Dr. Tobiska, you mentioned a Carrington-class storm. What
is that and how frequently do they occur?
Dr. Tobiska. Great question. They occur infrequently. First
of all, the name comes from an 1859 event that Dr. Gibson
mentioned where they observed it from the ground. They saw big
streamers coming off the Sun when the clouds were there in
London. That event caused aurora over Cuba. It caused balls of
fire going down telegraph lines in the Midwest, and it also
caused I think a fire in a telegraph station in Madison Square
Garden in New York City.
So this is where there's huge geomagnetic currents set up
in the Earth's crust. Those currents have got to go somewhere,
and they follow the path of least resistance, so they go down
power lines, they go down oil pipelines. Wherever they can go,
they'll travel. So that's kind of what a Carrington-class event
is.
The occurrence rate are very infrequent, although we had an
event on--in July of 2012 where, had the event occurred about
four days later when that region on the Sun was facing us, we
would have had an extremely large geomagnetic event, maybe not
a Carrington but certainly like a G4 level, like a--it'd be
like a G4 hurricane. However, it was on the side of the Sun. It
had just--the Sun had rotated around and we just missed that
one, so those happen maybe on the order of once every solar
cycle or every 10 or 12 years. There's probably moderate-sized
storms that happen every year, but that's kind of the frequency
of those.
Mr. Brooks. Was the 1989 Hydro-Quebec power collapse caused
by a Carrington-class storm?
Dr. Tobiska. No, it wasn't. It was a smaller storm than the
Carrington event, but it just happens that the ground
conductivity in that part of the--North America is very
susceptible to strong currents, and the Hydro-Quebec power grid
was not able to trigger off its transmission lines quickly
enough.
Mr. Brooks. And how long was there a power collapse in the
1989 Hydro-Quebec?
Dr. Tobiska. In that one it was for a few hours to a few
days in that region, yes.
Mr. Brooks. Dr. Spann, in your written testimony you state,
``For example, the electric power industry is susceptible to
geomagnetically induced currents, which can overload
unprotected power grids and result in widespread power
outages.'' What has to be done to protect power grids?
Dr. Spann. Well, I think there are kind of two things that
need a look at. One is providing the early warning to those
power grids so that they can--and I'm not a power grid operator
or an expert necessarily in this field but they can reroute
power in ways that the predicted induced currents on their
power lines would not damage their transformers, which, as Dr.
Tobiska mentioned, that is kind of the failure mode there, so
kind of reservicing how they route their power is one way, but
that requires some predictive capability. And so, again, trying
to understand how this works and providing that information
through the operational agencies so that they can provide that
information down to the power companies is--I think is the way
to prevent that sort of occurrence.
Mr. Brooks. I thought when you began you said two ways, so
we've got early warning. Is there a second thing that can be
done to protect the power grid?
Dr. Spann. Well, the early warning is kind of the initial
step. The second step is that the power grids need to develop a
system, and perhaps they already do, where they can reroute
their power so that it avoids areas that we think are going to
have large currents and being induced, so that would be the
second.
Mr. Brooks. Any judgment on how much cost as necessary in
order to provide that kind of early warning with the accuracy
and precision that is necessary for the power distributors to
be able to properly react and plan and minimize damage?
Dr. Spann. That's not something that I'm able to provide. I
think there may be other people on the panel that could provide
that. I would not know what that is.
Mr. Brooks. Well, my time has expired, but if anyone has a
quick answer--the Chairman might indulge us--on how much the
cost might be.
Mr. Babin. Sure.
Dr. Gibson. I'll make an answer which is that it's not a
quick answer because it's a complicated problem. To do what you
just asked for, which is to get accurate forecasts of how bad
the geomagnetic activity is, we don't have that answer yet, and
there's no one single thing that could be done that would do
that, so it would be hard to answer that question.
Mr. Brooks. All right. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Babin. Thank you. All interesting and important stuff.
I'd like to recognize the gentleman from Virginia, Mr.
Beyer.
Mr. Beyer. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much. And thank all
of you. It's a fascinating topic.
Dr. Spann, you wrote about how the Heliophysics Division is
in the process of selecting its next strategic mission and
decadal survey priority, the IMAP program. The boundary of our
solar system and investigating acceleration process is critical
to our understanding our space weather. How do you define the
boundary of the solar system, and why is that important?
Dr. Spann. So it's important from the aspect of just
understanding how the universe works, how our solar system
works. IMAP is the interstellar mapping acceleration probe, and
it is really focused on understanding the solar wind, how that
solar wind, driven by the Sun, how it expands and basically
defines the region of our solar system as it impacts the
interstellar space. And so interstellar space is the space
between solar systems, and there is a boundary that--upon
what's called the heliopause, and understanding how our solar
system and the solar wind expands and interacts with that
interstellar space, that is that boundary in which, for
example, the Voyager spacecraft you all may have seen have now
gone beyond that and understanding how that interface operates
and what physics occurs there is what IMAP is focused on.
Mr. Beyer. And the heliopause is where--basically where the
solar wind peters out?
Dr. Spann. Basically, it peters out. It buffets up against
the interstellar space, and that boundary is a place where
actually very interesting physics occurs, including perhaps
acceleration of cosmic rays and energetic particles.
Mr. Beyer. That's where it runs into the dark matter.
Dr. Spann. Yes, well----
Mr. Beyer. Dr. Jacobs, in talking about all the different--
the solar flares, particle events, CMEs, et cetera, go back to
the 1859 Carrington event, which is the biggest one, and that
you think it's 8 minutes and 20 seconds for light to get from
the Sun here, and it took 17 hours--17.6 hours for that coronal
mass ejection to get here. What can we do in 8 minutes or in 17
hours to get ready for one of these events that we observe?
Dr. Jacobs. Well, the 8 minutes is related to the photons,
and the 17 hours to roughly 3 to 4 days is the plasma. And so
it's the 1- to 4-day lead time for the coronal mass ejection
that's the real problem. And like we've been hearing from the
other witnesses today, the big--I think the hardest problem to
solve is understanding how to predict the occurrence of those,
not what we currently do, which is forecast how they will
propagate away from the Sun after the event happens. We need to
predict when the event is going to happen on the Sun, and that
is cutting-edge basic research.
Mr. Beyer. So we're looking for weeks or months of warning
rather than 17 hours? Right.
And, Dr. Gibson, in your testimony you talked about 1967
when space weather disrupted radar and radio communications
that was initially interpreted by the U.S. military as a
possible hostile act by the Soviet Union.
Dr. Gibson. Right.
Mr. Beyer. What are the implications for a major event--
major space weather event on our nuclear deterrent, launch on
warning, space missile, you know, the nuclear shield?
Dr. Gibson. Yes, I think--I mean, it's clear the military
gets space weather, and back in 1967 it was sort of a wake-up
call. And it's a good story. It's a story where it was because
they had space weather, it was really, really early days but
they had people on staff who were looking at the Sun and making
observations and were able to say, hey, the fact that those
radars are blocked, that's not the Soviet Union, that's the
Sun. And it took a while for the information to get around and
there were tense moments when there were aircraft ready to take
off, but the information did get out and averted some
potentially very serious repercussions.
And we talked about the EMPs earlier. I mean, being able to
know and recognize space weather for what it is is absolutely
critical from the point of view of our military preparedness.
Mr. Beyer. And quickly, do you have confidence that the
nuclear powers have a better understanding of this now than
they did in 1967?
Dr. Gibson. Absolutely, definitely have a better
understanding than then.
Mr. Beyer. All right. Thank you. Mr. Chair, I yield back.
Mr. Babin. Yes, sir. Thank you.
I'd like to recognize the gentleman from Florida, Dr. Dunn.
Mr. Dunn. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Dr. Tobiska, you caught everybody's imagination with the
airline trips. Let me just sort of plug that in a little bit
more. Was that analysis of the chest x-ray at 37,000 feet, was
that just an analysis at that altitude or does that take into
account the attenuation of the fuselage of the aircraft?
Dr. Tobiska. That's a great question. That is--that's--for
North America in particular, that's kind of the average dose
that you get if you're flying commercially, you know, at 37,000
feet for 10 hours. But that is only from the--as we were just
mentioning earlier, from IMAP, that's only from the galactic
cosmic rays----
Mr. Dunn. Right, right, so that's cosmic, not the CMEs and
what----
Dr. Tobiska. That's right. If there's a----
Mr. Dunn. So I was going to ask how that's affected by
carbon fiber aircraft fuselage now, which are coming into vogue
with the big super----
Dr. Tobiska. Yes. So basically, it's--it doesn't make a
difference. The issue is is that the really energetic particles
come in. Even if we coated the planes with lead, okay, which
the airlines wouldn't want us to do----
Mr. Dunn. Yes. There's a penalty for that.
Dr. Tobiska. That's right. The more energetic particles
would still make it through. They create a spray of lower
energy stuff, and it's that soup that we're actually embedded
in----
Mr. Dunn. So that goes to the CMEs then. There's no Faraday
cage available to us there?
Dr. Tobiska. That's right.
Mr. Dunn. Okay.
Dr. Tobiska. Yes.
Mr. Dunn. So also in your testimony you said 1990 NORAD
lost 200 satellites. Did they lose them permanently or
temporarily?
Dr. Tobiska. No, but that's a good point. So they--there's
a fence, a space surveillance fence, a radar fence that the
objects are coming through, and if they don't come through at a
certain time, they had to go and look for other objects. Well,
as it turns out, 200 of them from the big density changes from
that big geomagnetic storm caused the satellites to have their
orbits changed such that they didn't come to the fence at the
right time. So they had to go off looking for other objects.
But now a new object came through. They didn't know if it was a
missile or they didn't know if it was an old object that had
been delayed in its orbit. So that was a big deal to lose----
Mr. Dunn. They've certainly misplaced these 200.
Dr. Tobiska. Yes, right, they did find them there, but it
took a lot of work on their part.
Mr. Dunn. They just lost track of them right?
Dr. Tobiska. They lost track of them. Yes.
Mr. Dunn. Thank you for that clarification. I was worried
we were going to have to replace every single satellite.
So what steps do we take to harden our satellites these
days now that we know this? I guess that's a Dr. Gibson
question maybe.
Dr. Gibson. Practical steps, I think you need to--I would
first answer that you need to figure out exactly how bad it
could be, and that's this benchmarking activity. To say how bad
is it going to be from--if it's a Carrington storm or could be
even worse because there's the question of, you know, we've
only got 100 or so years of experience with this, and how bad
might it be in the future? And there's been studies, for
example, looking at other stars, looking at records on the
moon, in ice cores to try to get a sense of how bad the
radiation could be, and it could even be worse than anything
we've experienced or the Carrington storm. So that's the first
step is to get that climatology to get that set benchmarking.
And then in terms of the technical hardening, that's
outside my wheelhouse. I don't know if Kent wants to----
Dr. Spann. So I would just respond a little bit from the
technical side, as NASA builds its spacecraft, which are
science in providing fundamental understanding. Nevertheless,
they have to survive in space and have to survive these storms.
And so understanding how parts, electronic parts the sit on
boards, electronic boards, how they respond to that
environment, how different materials degrade over time, all of
these things are part of really understanding our space
environment and space----
Mr. Dunn. You're actually launching a probe into the Sun.
Dr. Spann. Absolutely.
Mr. Dunn. Or right near the Sun. So what are you doing to
harden that one?
Dr. Spann. Oh, that is a major accomplishment. That--the
big issue there, as you can imagine, is temperature, right? And
so there was a significant effort of--focused on the heatshield
that provides--it's going so close to the Sun but yet right
behind that heatshield it's a nice warm, you know, 80 degrees
Fahrenheit or something like that. It's amazing what they've
done.
So that's not--so that's a temperature thing but
nevertheless think of the same thing in terms of radiation
environment, how to protect those parts, the components----
Mr. Dunn. The charged height----
Dr. Spann. Yes.
Mr. Dunn. --energetic charged particles----
Dr. Spann. Right. And--
Mr. Dunn. Can you give me a hint what you're doing on that?
Dr. Spann. Well, I'm not a parts person, but I just know
that they do spot-shield them with some heavier elements, lead
and titanium and those sorts of things----
Mr. Dunn. So you're a great time manager. You've cleverly--
we've run out of time again. I want to get the answer to that
question so--
Dr. Spann. Sorry about that.
Mr. Dunn. I yield back, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Babin. All right. Thank you. Very, very fascinating.
I'd like to recognize the gentleman from Florida----
Mr. Crist. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Babin. --Mr. Crist. Yes, sir.
Mr. Crist. Thank you. And thank you to our witnesses today
for being here. We appreciate it.
The district that I represent is Pinellas County, Florida,
which is a peninsula. It's surrounded on all three sides by
water, and of course you know that Florida is a peninsula as
well. So I understand the importance of being able to predict
weather. It's pretty important to us in the Sunshine State. And
the same certainly holds true for space weather. And it's
important that we are sufficiently prepared to predict it and
respond to it.
And Dr. Gibson, I had a question. In your testimony you
write that ``Our best bet for filling gaps in our scientific
understanding of the space weather chain is through
observations.'' What kind of new observations would be useful
to our understanding of space weather in your view?
Dr. Gibson. So observations that get at the problem at the
source so can define the magnetic field and the eruption at the
Sun because if you're going to try to get it at the Earth, you
have to first get the input, right? And then observations that
show how it may change between the Sun and the Earth so, for
example, observations using coronagraphic or heliographic
imaging as it moves from Sun to Earth, observations from other
vantages where you could look down from the poles, for example,
or off from the side to really characterize this.
And then you get to the Earth. You need to get a better
sense of our Earth space environment, constellation
observations and the tail of the Earth's magnetic field would
be really important for that, and then, again, distributed or
constellation observations and ground-based observations of the
ionosphere and the upper atmosphere.
And I want to say that these are--emphasize again these are
both space-based and ground-based observations. A lot of the
observations you can do of the Sun, for example, you can do
with ground-based telescopes. There's a trade there. The
ground-based telescopes can get really, really big because you
don't have to launch them, and so you can do very high-
resolution observations. The space-based observations take you
to places, vantages, viewpoints that you just can't get to from
the ground and also let you see wavelengths of light that you
can't from the ground, for example.
Mr. Crist. Thank you. And is it important that we plan our
future observing platforms around our research needs?
Dr. Gibson. Absolutely, and that goes for the fundamental
research that we need before we can actually do much better in
terms of our forecasting, and it also goes in terms of the
applied research that we need to do to determine what the most
useful observations are for operations.
Mr. Crist. Thank you. And I guess to Dr. Jacobs and Dr.
Spann, is there a backup plan if any one of our space weather
observing systems discontinues working?
Dr. Jacobs. Well, currently, we are single-threaded on a
coronagraph through SOHO, which was launched in 1995, and it
was a research-grade probe with roughly a three-year lifespan,
so it was truly remarkable that it's still reporting data. But
we do know that we're expecting the solar rays to start to
degrade in their ability to provide power starting in 2020 and
be fully out of power roughly by 2025. And we do have a plan to
deploy a compact coronagraph. It'll be available roughly 2021
with a deployment around 2024 to 2025.
Mr. Crist. My next question is directed to all of the
witnesses. In your opinions, have there been sufficient
advances in our understanding of space weather since the Space
Weather Action Plan was released, and if not, why not?
Dr. Tobiska. I would just like to jump in with one initial
comment from the commercial perspective. The--I think across
the board all three sectors, the commercial, academic, and
agencies really feel that the agencies taking the bull by the
horns on that activity really gave us some good guidance.
And I think where we're at at this point is we've
recognized that we're all doing some part of this elephant of
space weather so that we don't unnecessarily compete with one
another or duplicate resources. We need to figure out a process
by which we can--between agencies, academia, and industry,
begin to talk to one another on a regular basis so that we
really coordinate our efforts and don't waste our resources on
it.
Dr. Gibson. And I'll just add that I think we've made great
progress but not enough, and we still don't really know what
the problem is. We're still defining the problem. And so we've
made progress, and we've got all these great activities and we
have to keep the momentum going and get a better idea of what
is needed.
Dr. Spann. I would echo both--not that we don't have the
problem solved, that we need more fundamental research, but
from an observational perspective I think a place where all of
us can play together is with some of these distributed space
missions that we really haven't talked very much about, but
we've talked a lot about solar imaging and trying to understand
and predict with the Sun's going to do but then understanding
how the ionosphere and the magnetosphere respond.
And some of the ways that we could observe that to really
make great progress is with these small satellite distributed
areas. And this is new technology that really I would say
industry and the commercial has really taken the lead on. And I
think that, as the agencies begin to better understand how to
use those very small satellite and those technologies, we can
do a much better job in terms of understanding and providing
predictive capability that can be transitioned into the
operational world.
Mr. Crist. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
Mr. Babin. You bet. Thank you very much.
And I'd like to recognize the gentleman from Indiana, Mr.
Banks.
Mr. Banks. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
First of all, I have a letter from Purdue University that I
would like I would like to enter into the record.
Mr. Babin. Without objection.
[The information follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Banks. Thank you.
My first question is for Dr. Jacobs. I understand that NOAA
has a number of international partnerships and that in return
provides data back and forth. I wonder if that is true for
space weather specifically or if there are any other countries
that generate space weather data, and does NOAA at all rely on
that data from other countries?
Dr. Jacobs. So the relationship we have with the
international MetServices is a little bit different than the
international space agencies, so it's roughly a five to one on
the space-based Earth-directed weather data we collect. We
provide roughly 5 times the amount of data that we get in
return.
On space weather, it's a little bit different. For the most
part, we are the sole provider of this. However, we are in
conversations right now with the European Space Agency to
potentially share different positions for coronagraph
measurements at L1 and L5. Roughly speaking, if ESA is going to
deploy at L5, then the thought is we may deploy at L1 and then
share data. So having observations from two different vantage
points would be very advantageous, but that's just preliminary
discussions right now.
Mr. Banks. Okay. Thank you.
Dr. Tobiska, in your testimony you mentioned that space
environment technology has been creating and sole-source
distributing the Dst index to the United States Air Force since
2012. Recognizing that we are in an unclassified setting today,
can you still give us an indication of the importance of this
index for the Air Force mission and operations planning?
Dr. Tobiska. Absolutely. The product was developed as part
of the Small Business Innovative Research (SBIR) program
through an Air Force research laboratory activity back in 2010
to 2012 or '13. We coordinated--or we worked with the USGS to
help develop this Dst index. They have an excellent index. It's
probably the best one in the world now at 1 minute resolution.
That data product then goes into the geomagnetic forecast for
Space Command as part of this whole effort to understand how
these geomagnetic storms affect upper atmosphere density. So we
provide operationally to them. Every few hours they get the
update from us both for solar as well as these Dst indices.
The one thing about the Dst index is that that particular
index itself really helped beat down the uncertainty in
atmosphere density because now we are able to get some time
resolution on how these big storms are occurring and when
they're recovering and to get a better handle on what it's
doing to atmosphere densities.
It's not perfect. Our forecasts to be honest with you are
pretty bad sometimes, and that's because we simply don't have
enough information to know exactly when things are going to
arrive or how big they're going to be. But we do make a reduced
time granularity product available publicly, yes.
Mr. Banks. Okay. Along that same note, Dr. Spann, how
important is the relationship between the Department of
Defense's ability to mitigate space weather risk and operations
and planning?
Dr. Spann. Well, I think it's hugely important. Thank you
for bringing that up. I think that the Department of Defense
relies heavily, heavily on communications, particularly ground-
to-Earth, Earth-to-ground in very, very different scenarios.
There are indicators that operations at times have been
impacted by space weather or probable space weather events, and
so they are very interested in understanding the fundamental
processes that particularly occur in the lower--in the
ionosphere that creates scintillation, and those types of very,
very applied aspects are some of the areas that the Department
of Defense is really focused on. And so, again, providing that
fundamental information so that they can develop a better
operational environment or tools to help the warfighter or the
planning of whatever they're doing is I think a critical place,
critical role that space weather plays in that.
Mr. Banks. I appreciate the feedback. I yield back.
Mr. Babin. Thank you very much.
And I'd now like to recognize the gentleman from
Pennsylvania, Mr. Lamb.
Mr. Lamb. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I'm just going to address kind of one wrap-up question to
everybody if that's okay. It seems like the common theme
uniting each of the issues we talked about, whether it's the
effect on DOD, the effect on the grid, and the effect on GPS is
your ability to accurately observe, measure, or research about
these events. So that tells me that you're looking for more
advanced or complicated equipment, personnel. Could you just
kind of break down a little more concretely almost what your
wish list is or what the needs are in that area?
Maybe start with Dr. Gibson because when we were talking
about cost a little bit earlier you kind of interjected at the
end that it wasn't a simple answer like you needed one thing.
Could you just name a few specific things?
Dr. Gibson. Yes, I mean the issue is that it's a system,
right? It's a system from Sun to Earth. So, for example, I'll
start at the Earth since I've talked a lot about the Sun. There
are interactions between the Earth's terrestrial atmosphere
coming up against the space environment so that the regular
terrestrial weather and space weather can interact in ways that
are hard to predict. And so understanding that probably
requires the kind of constellations that Jim was talking about.
Going back to the Sun because that's my personal love is we
have to understand what makes these things erupt in the first
place, right? I mean, we would like to get observations and
predictions that were more than just after it happens, after
the horse has left the barn, right? And so to do that we have
to understand the fundamental physical process going on at the
Sun, and we need better solar telescopes, bigger solar
telescopes. And then, as I've said, trying to track things from
Sun to Earth and as it hits the magnetosphere, so it's--think
of it as a chain, right, and think of it as there are gaps in
our chain and we have to fill them.
Mr. Lamb. And, Dr. Spann, could you address the smaller
satellite point that you've touched a couple times?
Dr. Spann. Sure. I'd love to do that. And I think that we
are understanding better how to use these very, very small
satellites, and we're talking about something that could fit
in--that would be a shoebox size or maybe a couple loaves of
bread stuck together. We are understanding how to use that
capability, and with more frequent access to space with those
very small satellites, they can provide in essence a swarm or a
constellation of individual observations spread across--think
of a grid, and in that way, just like on a grid where we kind
of map topography or something like that, you could map
different aspects of the low-Earth environment, geospace as we
call it in terms of magnetic field, electric fields, particle
populations, the temperature of those populations. All of those
sorts of things, the densities, all the sorts of things impact
our assets in space.
So developing the capability to use these constellation of
small satellites I think would go a long way in terms of
providing a lot of the information that's needed for some of
the models that are ingested into NOAA and into DOD. And so,
you know, a mission that I did not mention, which is the
Geospace Dynamic Constellation mission is exactly that. We're
getting--that is the mission after IMAP, and so we've got this
plan is really focused on providing the fundamental
understanding, but it all has a role in terms of the applied
component.
Mr. Lamb. Thank you.
Dr. Tobiska, could you follow up on that and just--you
mentioned I think at the very beginning about----
Dr. Tobiska. Yes.
Mr. Lamb. --various businesses providing the
instrumentation that some people talked about today. Can you
just expand on that, please?
Dr. Tobiska. Sure. Let's see. If--on a wish list for the
aviation radiation side of it, if the U.S. carriers, the major
U.S. carriers were carrying the radiation monitoring equipment
on their aircraft much like they do the TAMDAR system or the--
you know, the--that's where the Pitot tube comes out of the
plane and they measure the temperature pressure and humidity,
and then that is fed back to the ground via iridium satellite
link. That becomes part of the national tropospheric weather.
Just like that, if we had the--that kind of system on the
aircraft going over the North Pacific, North Atlantic routes,
that would give us an--that would give air traffic management
an ability to lower the fleet of aircraft by a couple thousand
feet or send it 100 kilometers equatorward to get around major
radiation areas. So that would be an example of a wish list.
Mr. Lamb. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield the remainder.
Mr. Babin. Thank you.
And I know that Dr. Jacobs may have had something to add to
that as well. He was kind of looking askance, so I'd like to
give you an opportunity.
Dr. Jacobs. Thank you. So I was just--to come back to that
question, NOAA is in charge of the operational forecasting, and
what's critical to that is having accurate and timely
observations. So our concern is not just to have better, more
frequent observations from different vantage points but to make
sure we don't have a lapse in any observing system capability.
And also to enhance and accelerate the research side so
whether it's NASA or the academic universities doing the
research to enhance that effort and transition that research
faster into operation so that we can make better use of it
sooner would be advantageous to us.
Mr. Babin. Okay. Thank you very much. And I think this is
going to conclude.
Oh, yes, I want to recognize--the gentleman from Colorado
wants to----
Mr. Perlmutter. Just thank you, panel. This is an excellent
discussion. We've been talking about really from the Earth to
the Sun and then outwards. There is one other component--and,
Dr. Spann, you touched on it a little bit--which is the
conductivity of the Earth in these charges.
So the--I promised Mr. Barheim that I would mention the
U.S. Geomagnetism Program through the USGS, which also deals
with these geomagnetic storms and how the Earth conducts the
energy from the Sun and the potential damages that may come
from that.
So just thank you to the panel, excellent discussion today.
Mr. Babin. And I would like to echo that as well, all very
great information that is so critical to the advancements of
our space program and also our Department of Defense and the
warfighting capabilities of our nation and the valuable
information that we can impart to our allies around the world.
So I just want to say thank you very much to all four of
you witnesses and to the Members for their valuable questions.
The record will remain open for two weeks for additional
written comments and written questions from the Members.
So with that, this hearing is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 12:01 p.m., the Subcommittees were
adjourned.]
Appendix I
----------
Answers to Post-Hearing Questions
Answers to Post-Hearing Questions
Responses by Dr. Neil Jacobs
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Responses by Dr. Jim Spann
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Responses by Dr. Sarah Gibson
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Responses by Dr. W. Kent Tobiska
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]