Climate researchers across the United States are facing uncertainty as a new proposal from the White House threatens to cut funding for critical weather forecasting and climate research programs. The proposal, outlined in a passback memorandum from the Office of Management and Budget, includes plans to reorganize the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and slash funding for its cooperative institutes and laboratories.
NOAA’s cooperative institutes, a network of 16 science consortiums involving 80 universities and research institutions, are at the forefront of lifesaving weather forecasting systems, toxic algae bloom monitoring, and hurricane research. These institutes play a crucial role in advancing our understanding of climate patterns and ensuring the safety of communities across the country.
However, the proposed cuts have raised concerns among scientists and researchers about the future of their work and their jobs. The passback memorandum, which outlines the White House’s budget priorities for fiscal year 2026, could have devastating effects on NOAA’s climate research programs and cooperative institutes.
While the proposal is still hypothetical and requires approval from Congress, experts warn that funding for the remainder of fiscal year 2025 is also at risk. The lack of clear guidance from Congress on how agencies should use their funds leaves room for the Trump administration to redirect resources in ways that could harm ongoing research projects.
If the proposed cuts are implemented, many cooperative institutes could see their funding abruptly curtailed, leading to layoffs and disruptions in long-term datasets. Scientists fear that the loss of funding could have irreversible consequences for research programs and the communities they serve.
For example, the Cooperative Institute for Great Lakes Research (CIGLR) at the University of Michigan, which monitors toxic algae blooms in lakes Erie and Huron, is facing the possibility of layoffs and program interruptions due to funding delays. The institute’s work is crucial for predicting and preparing for events like the 2014 Toledo water crisis, where 400,000 residents were left without safe drinking water.
Without adequate funding, CIGLR and other cooperative institutes may struggle to maintain essential research programs, putting communities at risk of environmental disasters. The uncertainty surrounding the future of NOAA’s research programs underscores the importance of supporting science journalism and advocating for continued funding for climate research initiatives. The Cooperative Institutes (CIs) alongside the Oceanic and Atmospheric Research (OAR) within the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) play a crucial role in advancing marine research and education initiatives in the United States. In addition to housing 10 laboratories, the OAR also encompasses various programs such as the global ocean observing and monitoring program, the ocean acidification program, and the Sea Grant program. These initiatives partner with 34 universities to conduct research and educational activities related to marine environments.
According to Craig McLean, NOAA’s former top scientist, the CIs are integral to NOAA’s research efforts, accounting for 50% of all research activities. Many NOAA scientists have emerged from these cooperative agreements, which are awarded on a five-year basis with the possibility of renewal for another five years. Some CIs have been in operation for decades, with CIRES being the oldest and largest, established in 1967. These institutes involve multiple university partners and employ numerous staff members, contributing significantly to data collection programs with direct impacts on society.
For instance, CIMAR at the University of Hawaiâi at MÄnoa monitors the entire tropical Pacific ecosystem, including marine life and sea level rise. Similarly, CIMERS at Oregon State University tracks various aspects of marine ecosystems, from salmon stocks in the Pacific Northwest to ship movements in the Arctic Ocean. These institutes are actively involved in ocean exploration and mapping critical areas such as methane reserves and mineral deposits on the seabed.
Moreover, CIs like the Cooperative Institute for Marine and Atmospheric Studies and the Cooperative Institute for Severe and High-Impact Weather Research and Operations play pivotal roles in enhancing NOAA’s forecasting capabilities. Scientists from these institutes contribute to NOAA’s Hurricane Hunter missions and develop advanced tools like Warn-on-Forecast to predict severe weather events with greater accuracy and lead time. These advancements are crucial in ensuring public safety and mitigating the impact of natural disasters.
However, recent funding delays and proposed budget cuts threaten the future of these essential research projects. Without NOAA’s support, many CI directors fear that their institutes may cease to exist or operate at reduced capacity, jeopardizing valuable research efforts and scientific advancements. The potential loss of NOAA resources could have far-reaching consequences for the American people, affecting critical areas such as climate science, national security, and economic competitiveness.
As the Trump administration targets NOAA’s climate science research, scientists from CIs emphasize that their work extends beyond climate change studies and encompasses a wide range of issues vital to the nation’s interests. They urge policymakers to consider the broader impacts of cutting funding for NOAA research and highlight the importance of science in informing decision-making processes. The proposed cuts have sparked outrage among science advocates, with warnings of dire consequences for public safety and economic health if NOAA’s research arm is dismantled.
In the face of mounting challenges, scientists and researchers from CIs remain committed to advancing marine research and education initiatives, seeking to collaborate with policymakers and stakeholders to ensure the continued progress of scientific endeavors that benefit society as a whole. The proposed cuts to NOAA’s budget have caused concern among lawmakers and scientists alike. Nine Democratic representatives from New Jersey recently sent a letter to express their worries about the potential elimination of NOAA’s Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory in Princeton. They emphasized the crucial role that the lab plays in developing models for weather forecasts, stating that without their work, Americans could face inaccurate predictions that could impact safety, the economy, and national security.
Senator Michael Bennet of Colorado also voiced his concerns, highlighting the importance of NOAA’s work in light of worsening droughts and wildfires in the western United States. He emphasized that the work of NOAA scientists is essential for national security and the well-being of Americans.
Despite these concerns, some former NOAA officials feel that Congress has not done enough to address the proposed cuts. In particular, there are worries that Cooperative Institutes (CIs) in red states, like the one in Oklahoma focused on extreme weather, may be at risk due to lack of opposition from Republican lawmakers.
Former NOAA top scientist, McLean, criticized Republican lawmakers for not speaking up against the cuts, stating that they are “cowering behind Trump’s voice” and failing to protect valuable assets in their states.
The potential impact of these cuts on weather forecasting, national security, and the daily lives of Americans is significant. It remains to be seen how Congress will respond to these concerns and whether they will take action to prevent the proposed cuts from being implemented.
This article is a reprinted excerpt from E&E News, a trusted source for energy and environment news, with permission from POLITICO, LLC. Copyright 2025.
