US military cuts climate scientists off from vital satellite sea-ice data – Space

Report on the Discontinuation of Sea-Ice Data Provision and its Impact on Sustainable Development Goals

1.0 Executive Summary

The United States Department of Defense has announced the cessation of processing and providing critical satellite sea-ice data to the scientific community. This decision, impacting researchers at the National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC), directly undermines efforts to monitor climate change and achieve several key United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), most notably SDG 13 (Climate Action), SDG 14 (Life Below Water), and SDG 17 (Partnerships for the Goals).

2.0 Background of the Decision

The U.S. Navy’s Fleet Numerical Meteorology and Oceanography Center will no longer supply real-time processed data from the Special Sensor Microwave Imager/Sounder (SSMIS), an instrument on the Defense Meteorological Satellite Program satellites. This action is part of a broader pattern of budget reductions affecting U.S. scientific institutions.

• Affected Agency: National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC), University of Colorado, Boulder.
• Data Source: Special Sensor Microwave Imager/Sounder (SSMIS).
• Initial Announcement: June 24, with a reported delay until the end of July following public outcry.

3.0 Direct Impact on SDG 13: Climate Action

The termination of data access creates a significant impediment to monitoring key indicators of climate change, directly conflicting with the objectives of SDG 13.

1. Compromised Climate Monitoring: Sea ice extent is a critical barometer of global warming. The loss of consistent data blinds scientists to one of the most sensitive indicators of climate change, hindering their ability to model and forecast climate impacts.
2. Inability to Track Tipping Points: Sea ice acts as a protective buffer, slowing the melt of major glaciers. Without continuous monitoring, the ability to assess the proximity to catastrophic glacier melt and subsequent sea-level rise is severely diminished.
3. Data Gap: The transition to alternative data sources, such as the Japanese AMSRS-2 instrument, requires significant time for calibration, creating a dangerous blind spot in the continuous climate data record.

4.0 Wider Implications for Other Sustainable Development Goals

The decision has cascading negative effects on multiple SDGs beyond climate action.

• SDG 14 (Life Below Water): The health of Arctic and Antarctic marine ecosystems is intrinsically linked to sea-ice coverage. Halting data flow prevents the effective monitoring of these fragile environments and the impacts of ocean warming.
• SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities): An inability to accurately predict glacier melt and sea-level rise jeopardizes the safety and sustainability of coastal communities worldwide, which are threatened by rising oceans.
• SDG 9 (Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure): Sea-ice data is valuable for commercial shipping, enabling safer and more efficient navigation through northern routes. The lack of data can negatively impact maritime trade and infrastructure planning.
• SDG 17 (Partnerships for the Goals): The unilateral decision by a government entity to cut off data to the scientific community represents a breakdown in domestic partnerships essential for achieving the SDGs. While international collaboration with agencies like JAXA offers a potential workaround, it highlights the fragility of relying on such alternatives when primary data streams are severed.

5.0 Conclusion

The discontinuation of access to SSMIS sea-ice data represents a significant setback for climate science and the global effort to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals. It weakens the capacity for evidence-based policymaking related to SDG 13 (Climate Action) and has tangible negative consequences for goals concerning marine ecosystems (SDG 14), sustainable communities (SDG 11), and global partnerships (SDG 17). The resulting data gap poses a critical risk to understanding the pace and severity of global climate change.

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

The article highlights issues that are directly and indirectly connected to several Sustainable Development Goals. The central theme of cutting funding and access to climate data touches upon goals related to climate action, life below water, scientific innovation, and global partnerships.

• SDG 13: Climate Action

  This is the most prominent SDG in the article. The decision to cut off access to satellite data measuring sea ice directly hampers the ability to monitor, understand, and act on climate change. The article explicitly states that sea ice is a “sensitive barometer of climate change” and that without this data, “scientists are blinded to one of the most significant measures of climate change.”

• SDG 14: Life Below Water

  The article connects the melting of sea ice to the health of marine ecosystems and the planet. It mentions that sea ice acts as a “buffer to slow or even prevent the melting of large glaciers,” which in turn threatens “dangerous sea level rises.” This directly impacts marine and coastal life, which is the focus of SDG 14.

• SDG 9: Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure

  This goal emphasizes the importance of scientific research and innovation. The article details a series of “attacks by the U.S. government on science and the funding of scientific research,” including slashing NASA’s budget, evicting the Goddard Institute for Space Studies and the National Science Foundation, and threatening dozens of missions. These actions directly undermine the scientific infrastructure and capacity for innovation.

• SDG 17: Partnerships for the Goals

  The article illustrates a breakdown in partnerships and data sharing. The U.S. Department of Defense is ceasing to provide processed data to the scientific community (NSIDC), which is a failure of domestic multi-stakeholder partnership. Furthermore, the reliance of US scientists on data from the Japanese Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA) highlights the critical need for international cooperation and data sharing to achieve global goals.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

Based on the issues discussed, several specific SDG targets are relevant, primarily by being directly contradicted by the actions described in the article.

1. SDG 13: Climate Action

   • Target 13.2: “Integrate climate change measures into national policies, strategies and planning.” The article describes actions (budget cuts for climate science) that represent a removal of climate change considerations from national policy and planning, rather than an integration.
   • Target 13.3: “Improve education, awareness-raising and human and institutional capacity on climate change mitigation, adaptation, impact reduction and early warning.” Cutting off access to critical sea-ice data directly weakens the institutional capacity of organizations like the NSIDC to provide early warnings and assess climate change impacts.

2. SDG 14: Life Below Water

   • Target 14.a: “Increase scientific knowledge, develop research capacity and transfer marine technology… in order to improve ocean health…” The actions described in the article—slashing budgets and cutting data access—do the opposite, actively decreasing scientific knowledge and research capacity related to ocean health and polar regions.

3. SDG 9: Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure

   • Target 9.5: “Enhance scientific research, upgrade the technological capabilities… and substantially increasing… public and private research and development spending.” The article provides clear evidence of the opposite, detailing how the government’s effort to “slash the budget” has led to the cancellation of funding and threats to NASA missions and research institutions.

4. SDG 17: Partnerships for the Goals

   • Target 17.6: “Enhance… international cooperation on and access to science, technology and innovation and enhance knowledge sharing…” The article shows a breakdown in knowledge sharing at a national level (between the Department of Defense and the NSIDC). It also underscores the importance of this target by mentioning the need for US scientists to turn to an international partner (JAXA) for similar data.
   • Target 17.18: “By 2020, enhance capacity-building support… to increase significantly the availability of high-quality, timely and reliable data…” The decision to “cease the real-time processing and stop supplying scientists with the sea-ice data” is a direct move against increasing the availability of timely and reliable data. The article notes this will create a “gap in scientists’ data — a blind spot in our monitoring of the climate.”

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

Yes, the article mentions or implies several specific indicators that are used to track climate change and the capacity for scientific research. These can be used to measure progress (or lack thereof) towards the identified targets.

• Indicators for Climate Change (SDG 13 & 14)

  The article explicitly names key climate indicators that are being compromised.

  • Amount of sea ice / Sea-ice index: The article’s central focus is on the “satellite data measuring the amount of sea ice,” referred to as the “sea-ice index.” This is a direct, measurable indicator of climate change.
  • Ice coverage on land and sea: The SSMIS instrument is described as scanning Earth for “ice coverage on land and sea,” another critical climate metric.
  • Sea level rises: Mentioned as a direct consequence of melting glaciers, which is exacerbated by the loss of sea ice. This is a key impact indicator.
  • Average temperatures (ocean and atmosphere): The article notes that “increasing average temperatures both in the ocean and in the atmosphere” lead to sea-ice melting.

• Indicators for Scientific Capacity (SDG 9)

  The article implies indicators related to the health of the scientific research ecosystem.

  • Public expenditure on research & development: The article repeatedly mentions the “slashing” of budgets for NASA and the funding of scientific research as a key issue. The level of funding is a direct indicator for Target 9.5.
  • Number of scientific institutions and missions: The article points to the eviction of the “Goddard Institute for Space Studies” and the “National Science Foundation” from their offices, and notes that “dozens of NASA missions [are] under threat.” The status and number of these entities are indicators of scientific infrastructure.

• Indicators for Data Availability (SDG 17)

  The article highlights the importance of data access and timeliness.

  • Availability of real-time data: The announcement by the Department of Defense to “cease the real-time processing” of sea-ice data is a specific, measurable action against data availability.
  • Continuity of data records: The article warns of a “gap in scientists’ data” and a “blind spot in our monitoring,” indicating that the continuity of a data time-series is a crucial indicator for effective climate monitoring.

4. SDGs, Targets and Indicators Table

Source: space.com