Recent advances in the weather science demand the immediate establishment of a vigorous, comprehensive, and imaginative atmospheric research program under governmental sponsorship. The lowest price for procrastination in this regard will be political, economic, social, and military paralysis. The highest price will be absolute obedience to the leaders in the Kremlin. Man’s extensive control of the atmosphere in which he lives will result in the almost immediate obsolescence of the status quo state. And here the United States is at a distinct disadvantage vis-à-vis the Soviet Union.
The “American way” is the product of our tradition and history, of our political institutions and processes, and of our attitudes and the types of problems confronting the American people. The United States’ ready availability of resources, our vast and expanding internal market, our skilled population, and our military successes in two world wars have created so great an optimism about American capacity for achievement as to be exceedingly dangerous in this technological era. The attitude that “we can always catch up and eventually surpass” will be shockingly proved false on the day that atmospheric scientists actually achieve large-scale weather control, if, because of our complacency or procrastination, those scientists are Russian.
Startling March of the Weather Science
Weather and climate are as old as the world itself, and everyone is by nature a weatherman of sorts, just as everyone is a philosopher. In view of this, it is remarkable that it has been only within the past 28 years that mankind has disengaged itself from its meteorological cocoon of passivism. It is even more remarkable that it has been only since July 1946 that mankind launched itself on a bold (though small-scale) and imaginative scientific program of weather modification and control.
In the short span of fourteen years, preliminary results have been sufficient to cause both scientific elation and grave international concern. That brief period has witnessed tremendous progress, from the creation of a cloud and a “miniature snowstorm” in a home-type, deep-freeze unit to scientific experimentation and commercial cloud seeding operations in the earth’s atmosphere involving billions upon billions of cubic feet of air.
Under appropriate meteorological conditions, Western scientists have caused rain and snow by seeding supercooled clouds with dry ice. Tremendous “holes” in these clouds and supercooled fogs have also been created. And, in some cases, clouds have been completely dissipated by seeding them with dry ice in experimental tests.
Similar effects in supercooled clouds and fogs have been produced by using silver iodide crystals as the seeding agent at temperatures below minus-five degrees Centigrade. In one instance, on 16 May 1958, a line of fleecy, white cumulus clouds near Rapid City, South Dakota, was transformed into a black thunderstorm in a period of about fifty minutes. An airborne silver iodide generator did the trick.
Scientists have also released rain from warm clouds by the injection of water drops and hygroscopic salt particles into the clouds. Warm cumulus clouds have been completely destroyed by seeding them from above with water drops and other substances. And warm fogs and stratus clouds have been dissipated in restricted regions by the use of certain hygroscopic material.
In September 1958, it was announced by the U. S. Navy that it had successfully created and dissipated clouds at will in a series of scientific tests over the coasts of Georgia and Florida during the period 29–31 July 1958. The seeding agent which the Navy used was ordinary carbon black—soot. Seven times out of seven, a Super Constellation aircraft successfully destroyed clouds in periods ranging from 2½ minutes to twenty minutes by seeding the tops of the clouds.
In five attempts to generate clouds in a clear sky, four were completely successful. This was done by seeding the atmosphere with carbon black at the altitude where cloud bases should be. The case of the single failure was attributable to equipment malfunction.
From a variety of sources, it is obvious that the Russians are also making a tremendous meteorological research effort. And since the launching of Sputnik I in early October 1957, there can be no doubt as to Soviet scientific ability. All facts considered, Soviet weather scientists are more advanced than Western scientists in the field of meteorology covering cloud microstructure.
To be sure, cloud seeding and small-scale weather modification are not the final answer to large-scale weather control. Weather and climate over all portions of the globe are the result of a sensitive balance of cosmic and terrestrial forces. But they are a great stride in the direction of large-scale weather control. And recent progress has been such that it is no longer visionary to discuss and plan for the eventuality of weather control. It will soon be a matter of survival!
About eight years ago, Congressional hearings on several bills introduced by both Republicans and Democrats revealed that individuals and organizations vitally concerned with water in this country—ranchers, farmers, utility companies, etc.—were spending three to five million dollars annually for cloud seeding and weather modification services. These activities actually covered about ten per cent of the land area of the United States. The necessity for their evaluation was obvious, and this need led to the establishment of President Eisenhower’s Advisory Committee on Weather Control. Not authorized to conduct basic research itself, the Committee was directed to undertake “a complete study and evaluation of public and private experiments in weather control for the purpose of determining the extent to which the United States should experiment with, engage in, or regulate activities designed to control weather conditions.”
International Aspects
Weather and climate are never neutral. They are either formidable enemies or mighty allies. Try to imagine the fantastic possibilities of one nation possessing the capability to arrange over large areas, or perhaps the entire globe, the distribution of heat and cold, rain and sunshine, flood and drought, to the advantage of itself and its allies and to the detriment of its enemies. We must think about it—now—for this is the direction in which technology is leading us.
The ability to control the weather and climate will become America’s and the Free World’s key to survival. Exactly when this will come about is difficult to say. In the opinion of the late Professor John von Neumann, it is not far off. Von Neumann wrote: “Probably intervention in atmospheric and climatic matters will come in a few decades, and will unfold on a scale difficult to imagine at present. . . . But there is little doubt that one could carry out analyses needed to predict results, intervene [in the atmosphere] on any desired scale, and ultimately achieve rather fantastic results.”
Von Neumann believed that climate control was a perfectly feasible technological objective, and that the key lay in altering the balance between the amount of solar radiation reaching the earth and that reflected back into space.
The question is no longer: “Will mankind be able to modify the weather on a large scale and control the climate?” Rather, the question is: “Which scientists will do it first, American or Russian?” And: “What will this mean?”
The disastrous droughts in the southwest, midwest, and eastern portions of the United States in the early 1950’s and the fifteen major floods in this country in the past fifty years clearly reemphasize the vital importance of weather in the national life of any country. While mankind is forcefully reminded of the necessity to bend its activities to the vagaries of the elements by the great convulsions of nature such as floods, droughts, blizzards, tornadoes, and hurricanes, we tend to minimize the fact that even in the so-called “less spectacular” changes of weather, great stakes are involved. The recent almost total loss of the citrus crop in Florida because of freezing temperatures, with damage in the millions, is just one example.
In another vein, with regard to the New York state elections in November 1958, a recent newspaper article stated: “ . . . clear sunny weather forecast statewide buoyed Republican hopes for a heavy Rockefeller vote from rural areas upstate, the traditional source of GOP strength. . . . Four years ago, when Harriman won his first term by a tiny 11,125-vote majority, scattered snowstorms upstate kept many voters indoors. The GOP claims the weather decided the election. . . .”
The ability to create meteorological and hydrologic well-being at will and to prevent meteorological and hydrologic catastrophe (and the ability covertly to create meteorological and hydrologic catastrophe) will place the science and art of government in an entirely new dimension and will require a major revamping in political thinking.
If certain states within the United States, or certain countries of Western Europe, decided systematically and covertly to dissipate part or all of the clouds over their regions for several months of the year—to invoke a “cloud blockade” in their own interests and deprive the areas to the east of rain—those areas to the east would be reduced to semi-desert over a period of time.
Obviously, reduced rainfall adversely affects plant life in general and grain in particular. Eventually, famine would result in the water-starved areas if corrective measures were not, or could not, be taken, and famine in certain parts of the world could easily lead to political upheaval and perhaps the violent overthrow of current regimes. Conceivably, drastic ideological transformations might even result if adverse conditions persisted.
When one considers that the capability of large-scale weather control automatically includes the possessor’s national and international control, to a very great extent, over agricultural yields, water supply, health, electrical power, lines of communication, the course and intensity of storms and hurricanes, and military aspects of national defense, the political and other implications are truly terrifying.
Drastic changes in weather and climate—intentional or inadvertent—depending on how they were initiated, could lead to scores of concomitant upheavals requiring political resolution. To mention just a few: the uprooting and relocation of populations, industries and institutions; severe regulations which would have to be imposed to preserve order and reason; economic near-collapse; drastic changes in national morale; and shifts in world power which would occur. And whether one or more nations possessed this fantastic capability would determine the political and other complexities.
While the economic consequences of small-scale weather control are immense, in the case of large-scale control they are almost boundless. The purely beneficent and coordinated employment of weather control measures over the globe would result in a magnificent world economy such as man has never even dreamed. And international atmospheric-economic agreements and programs could be established and implemented that would catapult mankind into a phenomenal economic prosperity.
Regardless of the magnitude or nature of man’s economic endeavor, weather and climate, directly or indirectly, have consistently played a vital part therein.
The use of animal milk as an important human food goes back to the dawn of civilization. In climatically temperate regions such as North America, Western Europe, and New Zealand, an adequate supply of milk has been assured. The situation is very different, however, in tropical and sub-tropical countries. There, animals are extremely inefficient in the hot and humid conditions because their body-cooling mechanism is inadequate. Even minor modifications of temperature and humidity would be of tremendous assistance in remedying this problem.
Wheat, highly sensitive to meteorological conditions, is a major and vital food in many countries of the world and plays a major role in international export trade. Hence, wheat production and trade, no less than wheat supply, are a vital concern of governments. In many respects, wheat exports have become a political weapon and now play a major role in the cold war between Communist tyranny and the Free World.
That small- and large-scale weather control will have a profound influence on world economics is obvious. And on the basis of present indications, weather control promises tremendous benefits for extremely small investments. The seeding agents—carbon dioxide, silver iodide, water, carbon black, etc.—are inexpensive, and when used even in small quantities produce weather phenomena of the highest magnitude.
Converted into runoff and concentrated into a reservoir, one inch of rain can produce electric power worth hundreds of thousands of dollars. A seasonal increase of rainfall of only six inches over one thousand square miles of wheat land in the United States increases the area income by over $3.5 million. Other economic aspects are the suppression of hail, which is currently responsible for extensive damage and crop ruination, the increase of snowpack in mountainous areas, the reduction of soil erosion, the steering of hurricanes away from land areas or perhaps preventing their formation, the prevention of forest fires, certain types of disease control, and innumerable other possibilities.
A severe drought impoverishes wealthy farmers and destroys large segments of near-starvation populations, such as the people of India and the Chinese. A bad winter freezes most of Russia’s ports and inland waterways and ties up Europe’s transportation systems. On the other hand, ample rainfall at the right time bulges the granaries and affords Eastern Europe exportable surpluses with which to purchase industrial and other equipment.
True enough, scientifically and diplomatically, international atmospheric-economic agreements and programs could be established and implemented that would catapult mankind into an era of phenomenal economic prosperity. But as long as the Soviet Union (with Communist China) remains an international conspirator, that day will never come. Rather, an economic nightmare—perhaps disaster is a better word—is in the offing for the Free World if Soviet scientists achieve large-scale weather control.
The heterogeneity of weather and climate explains in large measure the occurrence of the numerous types of society on this earth. It also explains, to a large degree, the differences in population densities, the levels of social development, and the varying degrees of influence which these types of society exert in world affairs. Each climate provides certain opportunities, but the decisions as to the manner and pace of exploitation rests with the individual. Climate does, however, exert a certain amount of “control” over human activity.
The framework of international relations is already being profoundly altered by the dynamic forces that have been energized by man’s new knowledge of himself and of his natural environment and by the effects of this knowledge on his moral, material, and ethical values and institutions. The degree to which that framework will be further bent and twisted in the future by large-scale weather control and the resultant social aspects and implications are matters which must be given the deepest thought today Once this scientific pinnacle has actually been achieved, it may be too late to begin formulating plans. These plans must be in existence. And if weather control is achieved by Soviet scientists, it will definitely be too late!
U. S. national interests are bounded by the globe itself. And there is no place in the world today in which social trends do not have some bearing on our national welfare. Our attention extends from the arctic to the antarctic to the high altitudes of space. And so it must be, for some of the most spectacular weather control plans involve the arctic and antarctic regions, breeding areas of the world’s cold air masses.
It is no secret that Russian scientists are out to garner all the “firsts” they possibly can. Suppose that Russia, in attempting to improve the harsh weather and climate of the motherland, were to create an adverse climate for the North American continent? What then? Such a scheme has already been proposed by the Moscow Institute of Power.
The Soviet proposal made over two years ago was that Russia and the United States co-operate in the construction of a huge dam across the Bering Strait. The dam was to be equipped with atomic-powered pumps to drive the relatively warm water of the Pacific into the Arctic Ocean. By so doing, the arctic area would be warmed to the extent that there would be year-’round Pacific ports for the Soviets. Siberia would be so warmed as to permit farming to ease consumer shortages. And average temperatures in Moscow, Berlin, and London would be raised about ten degress Fahrenheit.
Fortunately, U. S. scientists carefully studied the proposal and rejected it. Although tremendous Soviet social and economic benefits would accrue from this tremendous undertaking, it would result in adverse conditions for the North American continent. The flow of warm Pacific water into the Arctic Ocean would bolster the flow of arctic water across the top of North America. As a result, the cold Labrador Current would be so intensified that the already short growing season of the Canadian maritime provinces would be further severely shortened, and serious crop losses would be inevitable. It would probably also mean the termination of Halifax as a winter port, and proportionately lower annual average temperatures along the northeastern portion of our continent.
Many Soviet weather problems could be solved through arctic melt accomplished by the release of thermonuclear heat, “dusting” techniques, or the launching of a satellite carrying a thermonuclear reactor. The satellite would be put into a highly elliptical orbit that would approach the earth only in the vicinity of the North Pole.
Melting the polar ice cap would, of course, spell disaster for many ports of the Free World. Ocean levels would rise anywhere from a few feet to over 200 feet, depending on the degree of melt, gradually inundating every coastal region and port of the non-Communist world. Whole centers of population, industry, and activity would have to be shifted many miles inland. An area previously having little or no value might now become extremely important as a result of mandatory relocations. Resources previously available might now become inaccessible. Nations that are now powerful might become almost impotent. And nations that have been relatively poor might become rich. With all that is at stake, it is inconceivable that the Soviets would not employ large-scale weather control techniques as soon as it is within their power to do so, regardless of the effects upon the Free World.
The employment of weather control techniques directed against each other by the Communist bloc countries and the Free World would have tremendous social ramifications. Tensions would develop to the point of paralyzing a nation’s economy by strikes or riots. The administration of law and order could be seriously impeded. National morale would undoubtedly sink to an all-time low, and perhaps even result in the paralysis of certain governments and the stagnation of their economy. In various neutral and uncommitted nations, the creation of socio-economic tensions by small-scale weather control techniques would provide a fertile field for Soviet penetration.
In general, the disruption of social patterns by drastic and detrimental climatic changes would result in mass feelings of insecurity to be easily exploited.
Were it not for ideologies which profess that “political power grows out of the barrel of a gun” and whose unswerving purpose is to “bury us,” small- and large-scale weather control in the future could result in innumerable social benefits for all peoples. Weather control could open the way—on a global basis—for individual activity and social mobility to a degree not previously imagined.
Headaches for International Lawyers
The modern system of international law is the result of the great political transformation that marked the transition from the Middle Ages to the modern period of history. To recognize that international law exists, however, is not tantamount to asserting that it is an effective legal system in regulating and restraining the international power struggle. It is a primitive type of law primarily because it is almost completely decentralized law. And it is decentralized because of the structure of international society.
It is an essential characteristic of international society that no central law-giving and law-enforcing authority can exist. International law is overwhelmingly the result of social forces. It has no central organ for the enforcement of international legal rights, as such. This lack of system is obviously unsatisfactory, particularly to the weaker and smaller states which are less able than others to assert their own rights effectively. Yet, this is the international legal arena into which weather modification and control will be thrust in the near future.
Launching a Weather Balloon
The legal complexities will be as diverse as they will be numerous. Who owns the clouds, and consequently, the water in them? Do clouds come under the jurisdiction of international commerce because of the economic effect of drought and precipitation on national economies? What about common-law doctrine of riparian right? How about appropriation right? What if a rainmaker in one state or country deliberately or inadvertently seeds the clouds over another country?
What is a universally acceptable definition of “airspace”? What is the frontier of a state’s third-dimensional sovereignty? The Chicago Convention of 1944, the law-making treaty which governs in this case, does not spell this out. What will be the legal status of the region beyond that frontier?
What about the rights of third parties on the earth’s surface who may sustain drought, flood, hail, wind, etc., damage caused by the employment of weather modification techniques? What sort of weather modification rules should be applied by states possessing this fantastic capability? Should ex gratia payments (payments accompanied by denial of legal responsibility) for damage sustained from weather modification be automatic?
Will the concept of sovereign immunity apply to nations with a weather modification capability? And what about sovereignty over cloud seeding agents being carried by the air currents?
Of one thing we can be certain. If U. S. scientists are the first to achieve weather control, the Soviets will immediately demand of the General Assembly of the United Nations a comprehensive system of public international weather modification law. If, on the other hand, Soviet scientists achieve weather control first, the Free World will not know of it until after the tremendous forces of nature are rapidly advancing toward its destruction.
A Mighty Weapon
Since man has battled against man, there has been no type of military operation, offensive or defensive, tactical or strategic, which has been completely immune to the weather or its effects. And since this is so, the advent of weather control will indeed prove to be a fantastic and fearful new weapon.
Like it or not, the United States is already engaged in a scientific weather control race with the Soviets. And Captain Howard T. Orville, USN (Ret.), Chairman of President Eisenhower’s Advisory Committee on Weather Control for four years, has warned that if an unfriendly nation acquires large-scale control of weather patterns before the United States does, the results could be even more disastrous than nuclear warfare!
New Force in Power Politics
Our world system of sovereign states derives its energy from the only action principle which is appropriate in our existent type of society. The international political process can be summed up in a simple phrase, “power politics.” To put it one way, “states do what they can and suffer what they must.” This is the lesson of power politics.
In practice, power politics means that international disputes tend to be settled in terms of the relative power applied by each state. If a preponderance of power is mustered by one state, a clear victory is gained by that state. If the opposing states are sufficiently well balanced to preclude a forced triumph, a compromise is arranged which reflects the relative strength of the disputants. This generalization is applicable to either a diplomatic controversy or a violent conflict.
Power is relative, never absolute, and must be measured in terms of its possessors, its competitors, and its future. In international politics, military strength as a threat or a potentiality has been and is, the most important material factor making for the political power of a nation. But in the future, with the advent of weather control, this statement will no longer be valid. The phrase “military strength” will have to be replaced by the phrase “weather control.” When precise and extensive control of atmospheric processes and patterns is achieved, a new force—a fantastic force—in power politics will be born. This force might be christened “atmospolitics.” It might be defined as “the science of international relations in terms of the physical atmosphere and politics.” And there can be no question as to its future zenith position in the realm of power politics.
The Moral Dilemma
The word “morality” implies a set of approved social notions about what should and should not be done. These concepts derive from customs, tradition, and the thinking of man about himself and his relations with others and with the supernatural forces of the universe. They vary from nation to nation and even within the same nation, in some respects.
There is no agreement today among all states upon any single moral code by which to judge the propriety of state action. No all-inclusive moral code controls sovereign states. But the degree to which this is exercised in the United States places our nation at a distinct disadvantage vis-à-vis the global arena, and particularly the Soviet Union.
The U. S. native political philosophy is the doctrine of natural rights. Our ideology is grounded upon a series of premises which we hold to be true and of universal moral application. This absolutist doctrine has served us well at home in the past. As a result, we tend to assume that international politics is also organized upon a series of absolute dogmas of morality. It is our natural expectation that the principles of political democracy are applicable at the international level. And for this reason, we have often been fleeced and trounced at the international conference table in the last fifteen years.
Americans, as a rule, are, and always have been, the proponents of moral absolutes, such as “justice,” “honor,” “peace-through-law,” etc. Communist policy, on the other hand, specifically rejects any aspect of political power imbedded in moral convictions. The very foundation of the Soviet moral code embraces brutality, selfishness, an unrestrained appetite for more power, and self-righteousness, all leading directly and unequivocally to world domination by Communism. Into this international complex, weather control will soon explode. And herein lies America’s future—and greatest—dilemma.
If Russian scientists achieve precise and extensive weather control first, there is no question of their immediately employing it overtly for Soviet benefit, even if it might result in eventual disaster for the Free World. And we can rest assured that the Soviets will not defer the initiation of weather control until the theoreticians comprehend the complete mathematics of the atmosphere. They will be willing to take the risks involved, as long as the odds are in their favor.
Also, there can be little doubt about the Kremlin’s intent to create meteorological and hydrologic catastrophe for the Free World, gradually and covertly, once this fantastic capability is in their hands. The burden of proof would rest with the Free World, and proving the case beyond all reasonable doubt would be impossible—until it was far too late.
Such is the nature of the future American dilemma.
Conclusion
Weather control which might be initiated covertly by an unfriendly nation, with the victim-nations completely unaware that an “attack” had even been launched against them until it was far too late to stop—or perhaps even divert—the tremendous forces of nature set in motion, will immediately render the status quo state obsolete. So, it behooves each one of us to ensure that our national strategy be characterized by a bold inventiveness and a willingness to take large risks, if the United States is to survive and continue in the manner so ably designed by the American founding fathers.
The paradoxical lesson of the future era of weather control will be that when mankind has at its disposal an unparalleled degree of power, it will be forced to realize that the problem of ultimate survival can be solved only in the human mind. And for this reason, we can look to the future with hope.
An alumnus of Tusculum College and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Commander Kotsch is currently serving on the staff of the Naval War College. He has had extensive experience as an aerologist during World War II and since. He was chief forecaster, Joint Weather Central, for the first H-bomb detonation in 1952 and he has been Officer in Charge, Fleet Weather Facility, London, England.
★
A SHORT LESSON IN COST CONSCIOUSNESS
Contributed by Lieutenant Commander William C. McOwen USN
While conducting a lower deck inspection I discovered a 7-ounce machinist’s hammer under a locker in a vacant compartment which obviously had not been used for some time. I explained to the young compartment cleaner standing by the space that the tool should be taken to the ship’s machine shop where it could be used. By this action he would, in effect, save the government a dollar, the approximate cost of a new one.
Suddenly, the young man’s face brightened up and he said, “Excuse me sir, but if that is so, I know how we can save the government another two bucks.” Without further ado, he dashed out of the space, returned a moment later and proudly handed me another hammer—two-pound heavy duty type.
(The Naval Institute will pay $5.00 for each anecdote accepted for publication in the Proceedings.)