It is an article of faith among most atmospheric scientists that research in weather and climate will lead to products, such as better weather forecasts and more accurate estimates of future climate change, that will be useful to industry. However, genuine dialogue between researchers and industry is relatively rare. In order to expand this dialogue, and to find out what research is of most interest to industry, UCAR, through the Walter Orr Roberts Institute, the Office for Interdisciplinary Earth Studies, and the Corporate Affiliates Program, sponsored a Workshop on Industrial Interests and Concerns in Weather and Climate, 25Ð26 April. Following overview talks by Michael MacCracken (program director of the U.S. Global Change Research Program); John Shlaes (executive director of the Global Climate Coalition); Stephen Schneider (Stanford University and NCAR); Christopher Bernabo (president of Science and Policy Associates, Inc.); and John Firor (NCAR), representatives from industry discussed what they need from the scientific community. Participating in the frank and sometimes spirited discussions were senior representatives from the Electric Power Research Institute, the National Coal Association, the American Petroleum Institute, the American Automobile Manufacturers Association, the Association of American Railroads, the National Council for Air and Stream Improvement (an organization representing the forest products industry), The Analytical Sciences Corporation (TASC), the Insurance Institute for Property Loss Reduction (an organization representing the insurance industry), Cray Research, Inc., The MITRE Corporation, and Martin Marietta. The industries participating in the workshop were interested in weather and climate from two aspects--as users of weather and climate research and information, and as providers of weather and climate services to customers, such as other industries, the government, or research and educational institutions. Some companies, such as Cray Research and Martin Marietta, act in both capacities. Issues and products viewed as important included --better weather forecasts and warnings (0Ð14 days) --better long-range and seasonal forecasts (14 days to a year) --better understanding of physical and chemical factors affecting air quality, including development and use of local and regional chemical/dispersion models --better understanding of long-range (up to 50 years) climate change due to human activities, particularly emission of greenhouse gases The interest in the first two products resides primarily in the fact that better forecasts would increase the efficiency and productivity of industry and reduce losses associated with severe and extreme weather events (such as lightning; hail; severe thunderstorms and tornadoes; hurricanes; and persistent monthly or seasonal climatic anomalies like cold and heat waves, floods, and droughts). The industries related to energy production, for example, mentioned that billion-dollar savings could be achieved with a month or longer advance notice of anomalous weather patterns such as the 1988 drought, the 1993 floods in the central United States, or the cold weather pattern in the Northeast throughout the winter of 1993Ð94. In contrast to the need for more accurate weather forecasts for use in operational decisions and short-term planning, the interest in air quality and long-term potential climate change relates more to legislation and regulation that might result from public concern about these problems, or potential problems. For example, because of interest in air quality standards, the American Automobile Manufacturers Association is sponsoring research using a photochemical grid model to determine the differences in low-level ozone formation as a function of different emission-control strategies. Similarly, since nearly all industries contribute in some ways to the emission of greenhouse gases, all were concerned about possible regulations imposing restrictions or taxes on emissions. Concerns ranged from lack of scientific understanding leading to misguided, nonproductive, and costly actions, to putting U.S. industry in a position of not being competitive in global markets because of costly regulations and/or restrictions that would apply only to U.S. industries. Most participants, however, agreed with a "no regrets" strategy in which actions are taken that will reduce the threat of climate change and also make sense in their own right. Most representatives supported further research to improve climate models and thereby reduce uncertainty, indicating that predictions of regional climate with greater certainty than is presently possible would be useful in the long- range planning of industries such as those associated with forest products, energy production, and water management. All supported more efforts by the research community in integrated assessments in which research results from the natural, social, and policy sciences are placed in a framework that can be used by decision-makers. One of the most interesting discussions was stimulated by Eugene Lecomte, president and chief executive officer of the Insurance Institute for Property Loss Reduction. Beset by recent natural disasters of unprecedented magnitude, (hurricanes Hugo, Iniki, and Andrew; the Midwest floods of 1993; and the California earthquakes), the insurance industry has paid out more than $39 billion in the past five years, more than half (51%) the total of all catastrophic-event payments made in the past 30 years. There is a deep concern in the industry that these extreme weather events could be associated with climate change, and therefore past climatological records are not good indicators of the future frequency and intensity of severe weather events. The entire insurance industry is at risk. According to Lecomte, two "mega- catastrophes" would claim more than half of the remaining capital of the insurance industry. A mega-catastrophe is defined as one exceeding $40 billion in damage; for comparison, Hurricane Andrew cost $25 billion but could easily have exceeded $40 billion had it tracked 20 miles (32 kilometers) farther north across south Florida. Enhanced knowledge and better forecasts of these events, coupled with a more effective response by society, would reduce property losses associated with these natural disasters, and therefore is a high priority of the industry. However, it is important to note that the problems facing society from natural disasters and possible global climate change are as much, or more, sociological than scientific. For example, people often downplay the possibility that a natural disaster might affect them and assume that if a disaster strikes, someone else--such as the government--will bail them out. According to Lecomte, "People have the right to live where they want to--on a mountain top, over a fault line, at the river's edge, along the coast, or in tornado alley--but they do not have the right to pass the risk associated with living there to the rest of the citizenry." The issues involved are complex and can only be resolved by full, open discussion among the parties, as exemplified at the workshop described in this column. UCAR is committed to enabling those discussions to happen.