Advanced Earth Models Face Funding Threats Amid Policy Changes

The future of advanced Earth system models, crucial for understanding climate dynamics, is at risk due to proposed funding cuts and changes in federal policy. The Energy Exascale Earth System Model (E3SM), developed by the Department of Energy (DOE), stands as a leading tool for simulating complex interactions between the Earth’s atmosphere, oceans, and biological systems. Recent budget proposals have raised concerns among scientists about the potential termination of vital climate-related activities within this modeling framework.

In the 1960s, meteorologist Edward Lorenz introduced the concept of the butterfly effect, demonstrating how minute changes in initial conditions could lead to vastly different weather outcomes. This principle has evolved into modern Earth system models, which integrate multiple components—atmospheric, oceanic, and terrestrial—to provide a comprehensive view of the planet’s climate. According to David Lawrence, a senior scientist at the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR), current Earth system models are now more sophisticated and capable than ever before.

E3SM, a project spearheaded by the DOE for over a decade, has produced significant findings, such as the effect of Antarctic ice cavity shapes on tides along the North American coast. This model, however, faces uncertainty as the Trump administration proposes cuts to climate research funding. The model’s website has been stripped of information, and federal budget requests indicate a potential end to its core climate functions.

The proposed budget for 2025 explicitly states, “Any Energy Exascale Earth System Model (E3SM) activities involving climate are terminated,” a move that raises questions about how a climate model can operate without addressing climate itself. Lawrence, who has also led the development of similar projects, acknowledges that the future of such advanced modeling relies heavily on funding.

Recent investments have totaled approximately $100 million from 2018 to 2022 to enhance E3SM. Yet, these funds are now in jeopardy, with projected decreases in support from around $110 million to $30 million for Earth and environmental system modeling. Such funding reductions could lead to a loss of expertise, as many scientists fear that modeling capabilities may migrate to other countries, notably China.

Research conducted using E3SM has yielded critical insights into the effects of human activities on climate systems. For instance, study results published in Nature Communications by Yi Yao, a researcher at ETH Zurich, highlighted how irrigation can inadvertently increase humidity, creating health risks for farmers. This illustrates the model’s capacity to inform practical decision-making in agriculture and beyond.

As scientists aim to refine E3SM and develop a “digital twin” of the planet, the implications of diminishing support are profound. The model’s complexity stems from its need to account for interactions across various scientific disciplines, including physics, chemistry, and biology. Lawrence emphasized the importance of multiple models to accurately represent the complexities of Earth’s systems, stating, “There is no one answer.”

Concerns extend beyond the scientific community; experts warn that diminishing funding for climate research could hinder the United States’ position as a leader in global climate science. As Andrew Dessler, a professor of atmospheric sciences at Texas A&M University, noted, losing key talent could have long-term repercussions for American scientific standing.

The potential for a shift in climate research to overseas institutions raises alarms. Yao expressed concern about the implications of U.S. funding cuts, stating that the U.S. has historically been a leader in climate research. The erosion of this leadership could have lasting impacts on global climate understanding and response strategies.

In light of these developments, the future of Earth system modeling, particularly E3SM, hangs in the balance. With the threat of funding cuts, scientists are left grappling with uncertainty about their ability to continue vital research that not only forecasts climate trends but also informs policy and public safety. As the landscape of climate research evolves, the scientific community remains hopeful that necessary support will be restored, allowing for continued advancements in understanding our planet’s complex systems.