The International Weather Forum (en Francais: Forum International de la Météo) is an event that is held each year (mostly) in Paris. It is a great place for forecasters and television weather presenters from different countries to come together and discuss the weather profession. This podcast shows a few scenes from the 2009 edition.
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
When people ask for travel advice about a place they have never visited, I tell them to take the water tour. Cities in every country in the world grow up around their lakes, rivers, and oceanfronts – so that’s where you will find that city’s identify and history. Norfolk, Virginia is one of those places.
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
The European Meteorological Society conference is taking place in Toulouse, in southern France. The EMS gave Danny Roup from Israel its Broadcaster of the Year award, and he told a remarkable story.
In Israel (like most of Europe), the nighttime weather forecasts are videotaped during the daytime for playback on the air later. In the case of Israel, Danny says he has actually taped two identical weathercasts. In one, he is smiling and in a happy mood. In the other, he acts more somber, with no joy in his voice. That night, the control room airs whichever is most appropriate – the sad one if there has been tragic news occurring at the time, or the happy weathercast if there is not. He says that quite often, they end up airing the sad version because there is frequently bad news to report in Israel.
Here is a look at what it is like at the EMS conference.
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
We were all gathered in Geneva, Switzerland. Three thousand important people – and me.
The World Climate Conference (called WCC-3, because it was the third such gathering) brought together prominent scientists and global policymakers. The conference was held to discuss what is now called “climate change and variability,” to create the basis for the Copenhagen treaty talks scheduled for December. My role was small, as a panelist in the expert segment on communicating climate information. So I was able to spend time observing and learning.
It was a fascinating process, as one might imagine, being on the inside of what will be a global debate in the next few months. For instance, we heard from the man who will be one of China’s negotiators in Copenhagen, where a Kyoto-like treaty will be hammered out. He suggested that the world should adhere to Kyoto, which the United States opposed, in part, because it gave China and other “developing countries” something of a pass from carbon emission regulations. He also insisted China (which is now the world’s biggest C02 producer) is entitled to a break because of its sizable population, and low, $2400 annual income. But – and I thought there was a bit of news in this statement – he also said he had made eight trips to the US in recent months to talk.
During my presentation, I showed some polling data regarding Americans’ views on the cause of climate change (manmade vs. natural causes), and showed how those views have evolved in the past year.
I also talked about the way climate information races around the internet. Not even those who study climate change and variability can keep up with it all. I put a live Twitter search up on the big screen, so everyone was able to see how often Americans tweet the words “climate change” and “global warming” along with scientific information and personal opinion.
I displayed a graph revealing those terms were tweeted over 17,000 times in the previous month.
I have been to many international conferences over the years, but this one was special because the results of the World Climate Conference will form the basis for treaty talks that will affect most people on the planet. I consider myself very fortunate to be invited WCC-3, and to spend time with my weather colleagues in the great city of Geneva.
Photos are from IISD. Information about the conference is available through the WCC-3 website.
So how do things work at a big international conference? Mainly lots and lots of writing, re-writing, and finalizing of written statements that can be agreed upon by all. Based upon the World Climate Conference-3 in Geneva, this is my impression of how it happens.
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Geneva is truly an international city. Important people from all over the world live here, and this might explain why.
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
From the World Climate Service-3 conference in Geneva, a big international meeting setting the stage for what will be a major climate change treaty to be ratified in Copenhagen in December. Judging by what we have seen here, one would suspect the nations of the world will have to make some serious compromises in the negotiations ahead.
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Television meteorologists who make school visits inevitably get the same question from youngsters: “How much money do you make?” When speaking to adult groups there is another, equally uncomfortable question that comes up: “What do you think about global warming?”
We do our best to answer, as we are members of the scientific community and expected to give guidance on such matters. But it is hard to find the upside of giving an answer that, according to statistics, puts any television meteorologist (on either side of the issue) at odds with approximately 50% of their viewers.
Take the case of two excellent TV meteorologists who work in adjoining markets in Alabama: Dan Satterfield from Huntsville, and James Spann from Birmingham. Both are among the very best at what they do. Each is considered the dean of weathercasters in their markets; both are very smart guys and fine gentlemen. They both study climate science and talk with experts in the field. But they have come to an honest, carefully considered difference of opinion. Dan Satterfield believes in manmade global warming. James Spann does not.
James has received the greater attention. He was interviewed on national television for criticizing former Weather Channel climatologist Dr. Heidi Cullen, after she suggested that weathercasters who deny manmade global warming should not be certified by the American Meteorological Society. (The AMS has issued public statements about climate change.) Dan has long written about climate issues, and two years ago proved his sincere interest by paying his own way to the Arctic to report on the effects of warmer climate there.
Both James and Dan have received substantial ridicule and abuse for taking their thoughtful positions. James was blamed for creating a “cyber storm.” Dan has been accused of joining “with other recent frustrated ‘believers’ in man-made climate fears.” An emailer said Dan seemed to “prefer the practices of the inquisition.”
Most of the angry rhetoric has come from outside of Alabama, from critics who don’t know either man or how seriously they do their jobs. Just as with national opinion polls, the feedback about climate change tends to break along party lines. In advising fellow broadcasters who might be tempted to take a stand on climate change, James Spann cautions:
I would warn anybody that dives into this issue (they) will pay the price with a pile of hate coming from one political party or another.
World news World sports