Senate Democrats Aim to Reinstate NOAA Database Monitoring $1 Billion in Natural Disasters

Senate Democrats are working to reinstate a database that monitored billions of dollars in climate and weather-related disasters for decades, which was discontinued by the Trump administration this past May.

Since 1980, NOAA has kept a disaster database for events causing damages over $1 billion in the U.S., but the agency halted its initiatives this spring due to budget cuts in climate science research under the Trump administration.

The database and its annual reports shed light on how climate change is influencing extreme weather patterns, including increased travel to flood-prone areas and rising wildfire incidents. Lawmakers have utilized the report in assessing disaster funding while raising awareness about natural disaster costs.

In a statement to NBC News in May, a spokesperson from NOAA indicated that the closure of the database was “consistent with evolving priorities and staffing changes.”

Currently, Senate Democrats, led by Peter Welch, D-Vt., have introduced a bill that mandates NOAA to revive the database and update it at least biannually. Congress holds the power to dictate NOAA’s budget and outline its administrative functions.

Welch stated, “Our legislation is crucial to reversing the reckless actions of the Trump administration, restoring this database, and mitigating the expenses associated with emergency preparedness and natural disasters. This database is essential for understanding the financial implications of constructing homes, businesses, and communities nationwide after significant weather events.”

Neither the White House nor NOAA has provided a response to requests for comments.

More than a dozen senators have co-sponsored the bill, including Sen. Angela of Brooks and Chris Van Hollen, who represents Maryland, where NOAA is based.

This legislation may face uphill battles in becoming law as Republicans, who hold the Senate, are not supporting the bill.

The introduction of this new bill reflects mounting concerns and protests regarding funding at NOAA and other climate-focused organizations. Notably, NOAA’s database has seen leading scientists resign, with some leaving the agency in May due to the planned closure of the database. One of them, Smith, has since joined Climate Central, a nonprofit research organization dedicated to climate change, to continue the work he once conducted at NOAA.

Tom Di Liberto, a spokesperson for Climate Central, indicated that the organization has refrained from commenting on current policies or proposed legislation.

“We look forward to enhancing our in-house $1 billion disaster dataset,” Di Liberto noted in an email.

From 1980 to 2024, NOAA’s database has recorded a staggering total of $40 billion in disaster-related expenses. In the previous year alone, NOAA reported $27 billion in disasters, amounting to around $182.7 billion in costs. This year ranks as the second-lowest for reported multi-billion dollar disasters since 2023.

The analysis provided “direct costs” of disasters, encompassing damage to buildings, infrastructure, and crops. However, it did not factor in other important considerations, such as loss of life, health-related costs from disasters, or economic impacts on “natural capital,” including forests and wetlands, as detailed in a 2025 report from the Congressional Research Service.

NOAA adjusts its data annually to account for inflation.

Previous Reports highlight that developments in hazardous areas vulnerable to floods, wildfires, and other natural disasters have intensified over time, leading to an increase in both the number and cost of weather and climate disasters, ultimately raising the number of at-risk assets.

Moreover, climate scientists assert that extreme weather events are occurring more frequently. Climate change is raising temperatures, heightening the risks of heat waves, intense precipitation, and rapidly intensifying hurricanes.

NOAA has utilized a combination of private and public data to generate estimates, integrating information from the Federal Emergency Management Agency, the U.S. Department of Agriculture, National Fire Centers, as well as private insurance data.

Like NOAA, these institutions are also experiencing budget cuts.

Source: www.nbcnews.com

Database of Small Fruit Flies

For over a century, humble fruit flies have paved the way for many significant scientific breakthroughs. This small insect has helped researchers understand that X-rays can cause genetic mutations, with genes being passed from parents to children through chromosomes. A gene known as period helps our bodies maintain time; disruptions to this internal clock can lead to jet lag and increase the risk of neurological and metabolic diseases. These findings, along with nearly 90,000 other studies, are part of an essential online database called FlyBase, which researchers utilize daily to design new experiments more quickly. These tests could help explore the underlying causes of diseases and develop new treatments. Science builds on previous insights, and a comprehensive repository of past advances serves as a catalyst for future discoveries.

The website receives approximately 770,000 page views each month from scientists around the world, facilitating the development of personalized treatments in rare cases, modeling neurodegenerative diseases in humans, and identifying candidates for screening conditions such as Alzheimer’s disease. However, its vital resources are now facing potential layoffs that threaten its future and the ability to enhance research efficiency. This spring, the Trump administration withdrew grants used to maintain FlyBase as part of a $2.2 billion budget cut at Harvard University.

“I use FlyBase every day, and it’s incredibly essential,” said Celeste Berg, a professor of genomic sciences at the University of Washington. “What we know about human genes and how they function comes from model systems like Drosophila.” Humans share about 60% of our genes with the fruit fly known scientifically as Drosophila melanogaster. FlyBase’s current stability underscores how interconnected and interdependent research efforts are, highlighting how funding for one institution can have global repercussions. Over 4,000 labs utilize FlyBase.

Harvard received approximately $2 million annually in federal funds to maintain FlyBase, which constitutes a majority of the website’s overall operating budget. However, the University of New Mexico, Indiana University, and the University of Cambridge in the UK are partners and beneficiaries in assisting Harvard with FlyBase management. “This doesn’t just affect Harvard,” stated Brian Calvi, a biology professor at Indiana University who is part of the FlyBase management team. “The ripple effects extend to the international biomedical research community.”

According to Norbert Perimon, a professor of developmental biology at Harvard, the Faculty of Arts and Sciences temporarily funded FlyBase, but that support will cease in October. Earlier this month, a judge ordered the Trump administration to restore funding for Harvard researchers who lost the grant, but the funds have not yet been allocated to FlyBase, Perimon noted. The administration has promised to appeal decisions that could block funding flows. The White House did not respond to requests for comment, and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, which oversees the National Institutes of Health, declined to comment.

The Transmitter, a neuroscience news site, was the first to report the layoffs at FlyBase. The Harvard Crimson reported on the decision of Harvard’s School of Arts and Sciences not to extend provisional funding. Calvi mentioned that the FlyBase grant covered full or partial salaries for eight individuals at Harvard, three in Indiana, five in Cambridge, and one at the University of New Mexico. While Indiana and Cambridge have secured some funding to operate programs until next year, the New Mexico position ended in August.

Operating since 1992, FlyBase has been funded by the federal government for over three decades. It curates and summarizes research papers, organizes findings on specific genes, and catalogs information on genetically modified fruit flies to understand how particular genes lead to normal development. The fruit fly is the primary animal model for biomedical research as scientists have been able to map the brain to the genome, and it is relatively easy to handle. Berg, an avid FlyBase user and a professor at Genome Sciences, studies human development and how cells form organs. FlyBase allows researchers to search for and identify genes of interest for their experiments. Subsequently, they test how altering the expression of these genes affects cell placement. Thousands of fruit fly papers are added and summarized in FlyBase each year. Without FlyBase, Berg cautioned that researchers and clinicians could struggle to keep pace and miss crucial connections regarding specific genes.

Researchers from the Undiagnosed Disease Network employ FlyBase to determine whether pediatric genetic mutations contribute to rare, unknown diseases. They identify genetic mutations in patients and compare those with previous studies of those genes in flies. FlyBase also offers crowdfunding support on its website. “Given the importance of FlyBase to the broader U.S. and international scientific research community,” stated James Chisholm, spokesman for the Faculty of Arts at Harvard University. Two staff members from Harvard have already been laid off from FlyBase positions, with six more slated for layoffs in late September and early October, according to Perimon. “If we can’t retain key personnel, it’ll be very difficult to get people back with the knowledge necessary to keep the database operational,” Perimon remarked. “That would mark the end of FlyBase as we know it.”

Funding disruptions threaten plans to relocate FlyBase data to a new long-term home called the Genome Resource Alliance. The fruit fly, along with rats, mice, and worms, is one of several common “model organisms” used in labs to build the foundation for understanding human biology. The National Institutes of Health has allocated $5 million annually since 2017 to merge several databases, including FlyBase, WormBase, and Mouse Genome databases. Each of these contains information that human health researchers can cross-reference to study genes critical to human health more effectively. “If you’re studying human genes and need to access all existing information, you must visit all of these websites. I want one-stop shopping,” said Paul Sternberg, a professor of biology at the California Institute of Technology. The alliance’s budget expired on June 30, and Sternberg noted that they are awaiting a reclamation decision from the NIH. He mentioned that the funding disruption at FlyBase represents a new and unexpected challenge. “We need to move quickly, but with our staff and energy dwindling, we are at risk,” Sternberg expressed. “We can’t afford any additional obstacles.”

FlyBase had planned to merge with the Alliance in 2029. Now, Calvi and others are advocating for an accelerated merger before FlyBase’s financial runway disappears. Any donations the organization is soliciting are aimed at helping cover operational costs. “So far, we’ve raised under $100,000,” Calvi stated regarding the crowdfunding efforts. “We likely need a million.”

Source: www.nbcnews.com

Monday.com opts to develop a new database rather than buying an existing one

Monday.com launches more Ten years ago, we wanted to help companies build a highly flexible set of business tools, including CRM, marketing, operations, and HR, built in a customized way that you wouldn’t find out of the box. Not only did companies love the flexibility, they found that they were pushing the boundaries beyond the ability of the underlying database technology to continue handling all use cases.

So the company began looking for a successor. With a myriad of off-the-shelf database choices, you might think finding the right one is just a matter of time and testing, but it’s worth considering some options and talking to some experts. After Monday came to the conclusion that we needed more than what was available on the market.

One of the main issues was flexibility. Monday.com had no idea how customers would incorporate building blocks into their applications. This meant we needed a schemaless database to handle whatever the customer decided to build. So we decided to build our own database, but there was a twist: we couldn’t build a single database that would take over all future functionality. Instead, it overlays other databases to handle specific tasks.it called New solution MondayDB.

The new database has been in place since July, and even though the company has migrated to the new database, the old database still exists as another layer in the complex Monday.com architecture.

No matter how careful they are with their technology choices, startups struggle to bring their products to market, which is often not possible, and they are often unable to see how their products grow and develop over time. You must realize that there is no way to predict what will happen. At some point, though, companies will have to start with a completely new architecture and pay off their technical debt, as Monday.com had to do.

We spoke with Daniel Lereya, Chief Product and Technology Officer, to learn how his team decided to build this solution and the challenges they faced in finding a database technology that met these unique requirements. I learned about the challenges I faced.

Another manic Monday

The process leading to the construction of the database has been going on for several years. In fact, the company started considering the idea of ​​a new database in his January 2021 with a completely open mindset. Lereya says customers value his Monday.com because of the flexibility it provides, and the company needed a solution that could manage an adaptable approach.

Source: techcrunch.com