Former NOAA employees built Climate.us to preserve climate data and resources
Former NOAA staff have launched Climate.us, an independent mirror of the now-gutted U.S. government climate.gov site, sparking debate over who should collect, host and interpret critical climate and weather data. Commenters argue over whether such infrastructure is best funded and safeguarded by tax-supported public agencies or by private and philanthropic efforts, raising concerns about politicization, long-term reliability, and the risk of both government interference and corporate capture. Many see robust, publicly accessible climate data as a core public good essential for science, policy, and everyday decision-making.
Role of Government in Climate & Weather Data
- Many see climate and weather observation as a core government function, citing long historical precedent and global-scale externalities.
- Others argue data dissemination (websites, APIs) can be handled privately, with government focusing on collection only.
- Some fear privatization leads to “pay twice” (taxes plus fees) and rent-seeking; others say operating large-scale APIs isn’t free and big users like tech firms would be subsidized.
Funding: Taxes vs Donations vs Markets
- Strong support for tax-funded, stable public infrastructure rather than donation-driven efforts, especially for long-horizon climate work.
- A minority advocates “if you care, pay” via donations and private initiatives, skeptical of broad public funding.
- Concerns that piecemeal, charity-style funding favors the ultra-wealthy and politicized causes, undermining systematic research.
Trust, Bias, and Oversight
- Debate over whether government or private firms are more likely to bias or hide inconvenient data.
- Examples raised of corporations suppressing harmful findings, and of governments suppressing or spinning climate data.
- Some propose both government and private datasets so discrepancies can be cross-checked; courts as arbiters are seen by some as captured or uneven.
Politicization, Project 2025, and NOAA Cuts
- Dispute over how real and ongoing the threat is to NOAA and public data:
- One side cites budget proposals, staffing cuts (DOGE), balloon-launch reductions, and Project 2025 language as evidence of attempted downsizing and commercialization.
- The other side emphasizes congressional pushback, continued hiring, and longstanding commercial-data programs as normal evolution, warning against “crying wolf.”
- Unclear/contested: actual scale of staffing shortages, extent of commercialization growth, and whether actions are coherent policy or chaotic dysfunction.
Data Access, Scale, and Services
- Raw data remain widely available via NOAA/NWS APIs and other repositories; climate.gov mainly provided contextual articles and synthesized information.
- Several note that exabyte-scale climate records make universal direct access impractical; computing “in place” is often needed.
Archiving, Public Domain, and Alternatives
- US government data are public domain; this enabled migration of climate.gov content to Climate.us.
- New site is funded by donations; some celebrate it as preservation and independence, others see it as evidence of defunding/public-service erosion.
- Discussion of better default archiving (e.g., Library of Congress web archives, IPFS-like distribution) to prevent future data loss.