In today’s modern era both AI and human methods are being used in

climate forecasting. AI uses past data and pattern recognition while human
methods use technologies like weather stations, satellites, and weather
balloons, then utilizing data within complex computer models (known as
climate models) to simulate future climate conditions, often by adjusting
variables like greenhouse gas emissions to analyze potential impacts on the
planet. Both methods can produce good results and be beneficial for
mankind.

But what are the pros and the cons of each? Are they harmful to the
environment? What is the cost effectiveness of each method? Are both
methods even ethical? To answer those questions, we must first understand
specifically how each method works. We must also understand their
advantages and disadvantages. We must also know how each method is
even used. Only then can we understand their similarities and differences.

To commence, we must first understand what AI even is. So, what is

AI? AI stands for “Artificial Intelligence,” which simulates human intelligence
using machines, especially computer systems. These processes include
learning, reasoning, and self-correction. AI encompasses a broad range of
technologies that enable machines to perform tasks that typically require
human intelligence, such as problem-solving, understanding natural
language, recognizing patterns, and learning from experience. Artificial
intelligence (AI) is used in a wide range of fields including healthcare,
finance, manufacturing, retail, transportation, security, agriculture,
education, and entertainment, with applications like medical diagnosis, fraud
detection, quality control, personalized recommendations, self-driving cars,
facial recognition, crop optimization, adaptive learning, and content
generation.

Secondly, we must know how AI is used in the field of climate

forecasting. Artificial intelligence (AI) is used in climate forecasting by
analyzing vast amounts of historical weather data to identify complex
patterns and trends, allowing for more accurate predictions of future weather
conditions, including extreme events, by leveraging machine learning
algorithms to improve the speed and precision of traditional climate models,
particularly in identifying subtle changes and providing early warnings of
severe weather.

On the other hand, we must understand the human-driven methods of

climate forecasting. Human-driven methods of climate forecasting primarily
involve expert meteorologists interpreting and analyzing data from various
sources like weather stations, satellites, and radar, using their knowledge of
atmospheric patterns to make predictions, often by adjusting and refining
the output of computer models to produce more accurate forecasts; this
includes techniques like ensemble forecasting where multiple models are
considered to account for uncertainties.

Furthermore, we must know how human-driven models work. Climate

models are based on well-documented physical processes to simulate the
transfer of energy and materials through the climate system. Climate
models, also known as general circulation models or GCMs, use
mathematical equations to characterize how energy and matter interact in
different parts of the ocean, atmosphere, land. Building and running a
climate model is a complex process of identifying and quantifying Earth
system processes, representing them with mathematical equations, setting
variables to represent initial conditions and subsequent changes in climate
forcing, and repeatedly solving the equations using powerful
supercomputers.

Additionally, we need to know what technologies and devices are used

in both methods. Climate forecasting primarily utilizes technologies like
satellite data, weather radar, supercomputers, General Circulation Models
(GCMs), Earth System Models (ESMs), statistical models, and various
atmospheric observation systems to collect and analyze vast datasets about
the Earth's atmosphere, oceans, and land surface, allowing for predictions of
future climate conditions. This means that both methods require these things
to operate.

With this knowledge we can now assess the benefits and limitations of
each method. Beginning with the benefits of AI in climate weather
forecasting. Data Processing Speed: AI can process vast amounts of data
quickly, providing faster and more accurate forecasts. Traditional methods
often involve manual data analysis and can be time-consuming. Pattern
Recognition: AI excels in recognizing complex patterns in weather data. This
capability allows AI to make more accurate predictions by understanding the
nuanced interactions between different weather variables. AI is also able to
provide enhanced prediction of extreme weather events, faster forecast
generation, and facilitating informed decision-making for climate change
adaptation strategies by providing more precise future climate scenarios.

Continuing, we need to know AI’s limitations and challenges.

Computational Resources: AI models require significant computational power
and resources for training and deployment. Investing in robust infrastructure
and optimizing models for efficiency can address this challenge.
Understanding Physics: AI alone cannot fully understand the physics of
weather systems, while NWP (human made models using physics) models
can. AI models rely on data-driven approaches and may overlook
fundamental physical principles governing atmospheric processes and
therefore must be trained on NWP models. Furthermore, AI faces challenges
like Data Quality and Completeness: AI models require vast amounts of high-
quality data to function effectively. Incomplete or inaccurate data can lead to
erroneous predictions, undermining the reliability of the forecasts.
Computational Demands: Running complex AI models necessitates
substantial computational resources. Ensuring that meteorological agencies
and organizations have access to the necessary technology and
infrastructure is critical for leveraging AI’s full potential.

Now what are the benefits of human driven methods? Human methods
in climate forecasting offer significant benefits by allowing for interpretation,
context, and communication of complex climate model outputs, enabling
tailored responses to local conditions, effective risk assessment, and clear
communication of potential impacts to decision-makers and the public, which
are crucial for mitigation and adaptation strategies related to climate
change. Adapting forecasts to local needs: Human expertise allows for
tailoring climate forecasts to specific regions and communities, providing
more relevant information for local planning and response. Quality control
and model evaluation: Humans can analyze and assess the reliability of
climate models, identifying potential biases and limitations in the data.

Now what are the challenges and limitations to human methods of

climate forecasting? Human methods of climate forecasting face significant
challenges due to the complex and chaotic nature of the atmosphere,
including data gaps, limitations in computer models, the "butterfly effect"
where small changes can have large impacts, and difficulties accurately
predicting extreme weather events, especially at regional or local levels,
making long-term forecasts less reliable than short-term ones; further
complexities arise from incorporating human impacts on the climate system
and the need for robust data collection across diverse geographical regions.

Finally, we can answer the questions we may have on our minds,

beginning with whether either method is harmful to the environment. AI
methods of climate forecasting can be considered harmful to the
environment due to the high energy consumption required to train and run
complex AI models, which often rely on large data centers that contribute to
greenhouse gas emissions and water usage; however, the potential benefits
of using AI to improve climate predictions and inform mitigation strategies
can outweigh this negative impact if developed and used responsibly. On the
other hand, human-driven methods are not considered to be harmful to the
environment as the devices used to not negatively impact the environment
in any way.

Next, we can know how cost-effective each method is. AI is considered

highly cost-effective in climate forecasting, as it can produce accurate
predictions while using significantly less computing power and energy
compared to traditional weather models, making it a more affordable option,
especially for regions with limited resources; some AI models like GraphCast
can be up to 1,000 times cheaper to run in terms of energy consumption
than conventional forecasting methods. On the other hand, Human methods
of climate forecasting alone are generally considered not very cost-effective
compared to modern Ai models, as the level of detail and accuracy required
for reliable climate predictions often surpasses the capabilities of human
analysis without significant technological support; however, human expertise
remains valuable for interpreting complex model outputs and applying
context-specific knowledge to forecasts.

Finally, we can now answer the question of whether either method is

even ethical. While AI methods can be powerful tools for climate forecasting,
their ethical use is a complex issue due to potential biases in data, lack of
transparency in models, and concerns about equitable access to information,
meaning that careful consideration is needed to ensure ethical application of
AI in climate prediction; in some cases, if not properly addressed, AI climate
forecasting could be considered unethical. However, human methods of
climate forecasting are considered to be ethical as they do not harm anyone
due to extreme moderation from organizations and governments.

In essence, both human and AI methods bring benefits and limitations. They
both impact our society today in major ways. Both methods help to protect
people from natural disasters. They also help with learning and
understanding global climate change occurring in today’s world. The
application of each method is up to the discretion of governments in the
world. There is no right or wrong answer in the decision on which method to
use. As either method impacts our world in similar and different ways.