NOAA’s future at risk: Possible cuts raise red flags over impact on safety and climate
By Johani Carolina Ponce
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) is essential to public safety and key sectors of the American economy, such as aviation and agriculture. However, recent reports from media outlets such as The Guardian and The Boston Globe suggest that the Trump administration is considering significant cuts to NOAA’s budget. These actions could be aligned with the proposals of “Project 2025,” a conservative plan that advocates dismantling and downsizing NOAA, transferring many of its functions to other entities or privatizing them. Although there has been no official announcement from the administration, this information has raised concerns among scientists and vulnerable communities that depend on NOAA’s services.
Importance of the National Weather Service
The National Weather Service (NWS), a division of NOAA, is responsible for issuing more than 734,000 weather forecasts and approximately 45,000 severe weather alerts annually. To do so, it operates a nationwide network of 160 high-resolution Doppler radars, known as NEXRAD, that detect precipitation and winds, providing essential information for identifying severe storms and issuing timely alerts. In addition, the NWS supplies critical data that impacts the safety and efficiency of air and agricultural operations, helping to plan safe routes and informed decisions about planting and harvesting.
Potential budget cuts
Potential cuts could affect the agency’s ability to provide accurate forecasts and timely alerts. “Project 2025” proposes dismantling and downsizing NOAA, transferring many of its functions to other entities or privatizing them. (Project 2025 from page 674 to page 677). Although during his 2024 presidential campaign, Donald Trump publicly distanced himself from “Project 2025,” describing it as “seriously extreme,” his executive actions at the start of his second term reflect a notable alignment with the proposals of the project. For example, on January 20, 2025, he signed Executive Order 14162, titled “Putting America First in International Environmental Agreements,” which orders the withdrawal of the United States from the Paris Agreement and other international climate commitments.
Impact on vulnerable communities
In an interview conducted by this journalist, Dr. Julie A. Gonzalez, an environmental justice researcher at American University, warned that a reduction in the NOAA staff would diminish the ability to anticipate extreme weather events, putting vulnerable populations at risk. “A significant reduction in NOAA’s workforce would weaken the scientific foundation that communities rely on for timely forecasts and warnings. This gap would be most dangerous for low-income neighborhoods and other at-risk populations, who face storms, floods, and heat waves,” Gonzalez explained.
Her research on air quality, extreme temperatures, and mortality confirms that communities with higher rates of poverty and lower English proficiency experience higher mortality risks. Reducing resources at NOAA would intensify this inequality. “If NOAA loses the ability to provide critical data for weather prediction, uncertainty will increase across the country, but the most severe consequences will fall on those least able to recover,” she warned.
Privatization of weather services
In addition to potential cuts, “Project 2025” proposes the privatization of NOAA’s weather services. From an environmental justice perspective, Gonzalez warns that this privatization would deepen the gap between those who can pay for weather information and those who cannot. “Privatizing NOAA’s weather services would create financial and access barriers that would disproportionately affect low-income communities, who rely on free, real-time data to stay safe,” he explained.
The implications of restricting access to weather information would be devastating. “If NOAA’s forecast services are limited to those who can afford them, low-income communities could be left with late, incomplete, or inaccurate warnings, putting lives and livelihoods at risk,” Gonzalez said.
Consequences of resource cuts
NOAA cuts could affect the accuracy of weather forecasts, weakening the ability of cities and states to prepare for natural disasters. Gonzalez stresses that the effects of resource cuts can be measured with statistical tools and spatial models.
“Accurate forecasts depend on continuous data from satellites, ocean buoys and ground stations, all maintained and analyzed by NOAA. Budget cuts would weaken this network, causing gaps in data and reducing forecast accuracy, especially in regions with fewer monitoring stations,” he explained.
The consequences of not investing in weather prediction have already been evident in the past. During the Chicago heat wave in 1995, more than 700 people died due to a lack of timely warnings. In 2012, European models more accurately predicted the path of Hurricane Sandy compared to American models, in part because European centers had made more robust investments in modeling technology. Gonzalez warns that a weakened NOAA would also affect cities’ ability to take action.
