Would the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the U.S. Geological Survey be more effective if they were to merge into an all-encompassing Earth Systems Science Agency (ESSA)? Yes, according to a surprising paper by former scientists and administrators at the two agencies, published last week in Science.

The authors argue that consolidating NOAA and USGS would allow the two agencies to collaborate on research of the Earth's environment -- particularly global warming -- while cutting costs at the same time. "It doesn't make sense to have scientists working in such similar areas in two different agencies -- they should be working side by side,'' said former USGS head Mark Schaefer.

According to the article, a merger would allow scientists to more effectively tackle 'unprecedented' environmental and economic challenges in the decades ahead. "Foremost among them will be climate change, sea-level rise, altered weather patterns, declines in freshwater availability and quality and loss of biodiversity."

[Old school EnviroWonks may recall that such a consolidation would revive the acronym ESSA. Prior to 1970, NOAA was known as the Environmental Science Services Administration.]

We get the science argument here, but wonder about the bureaucratic nightmare of combining a $4 billion, 12,000-employee arm of the Commerce Department (NOAA), with a $1 billion, 8,500-employee arm of the Interior Department (USGS). We're just not convinced that's going to create less red tape.