Yes, it takes money to launch them. At about $250 in materials per launch, that's over $180,000 a year. Add in the cost of additional personnel to launch and gather the data and it's a significant expense. And money is going to be even tighter in the coming years as government spending is reduced. So don't look for any soundings near Houston in the coming decade.
The one chance is that the local NWS does something like ImpactWeather is doing - buy a few radiosonde units for use in critical forecasts (like the snow/ice storm last winter or major severe weather events) and use U of H students to launch them. That would significantly reduce the cost.
I understand it's expensive & funding is tight, but imagine how much the ice event alone cost in insurance claims & lost hours - maybe inventive funding is the key? Maybe insurance companies, airlines or others that benefit from accurate weather forecasting might be persuaded to chip in for some? Right now, the cost of not having it is likely covered by higher premiums (I'm just guessing here, have no data)
unome wrote:I understand it's expensive & funding is tight, but imagine how much the ice event alone cost in insurance claims & lost hours - maybe inventive funding is the key? Maybe insurance companies, airlines or others that benefit from accurate weather forecasting might be persuaded to chip in for some? Right now, the cost of not having it is likely covered by higher premiums (I'm just guessing here, have no data)
There's no question more accurate forecasts can benefit everyone. However, it's a matter of priorities when deciding on a budget. It's easier to cut something like weather balloons as it's not as personal as other choices.
By the way, I hear that the article had an error regarding ImpactWeather's purchase of radiosondes. They bought only 5 of the radiosondes. It's the University of Houston that purchased 70 units.