SODBatch A&B SPM Comments co-chair response final ... - ipcc-wg3

Chapter-
Comment
para
Batch
From Page
From Line
To Page
To line
Comments
IPCC WGIII Fourth Assessment Report, Second Order Draft
Expert Review of Second-Order-Draft
Confidential, Do Not Cite or Quote
Response suggested by cochairs
Action
for
chapter
Considerations
by the writing
team
SPM- 5 A 6 0 0 0
lived substances such as aerosols are included.
(Government of Germany)
Table SPM 1: in Column 10 (peaking year for CO2 emissions) it CHECK 3 Noted. See
433 T
should read "2000-2030" for Category A Scenarios as described in
comment SPM-
1
CH. 3, page 54, line 16
421.
(Government of Germany)
(3)
SPM- 5 A 6 0 0 0 Table SPM 1: For policymakers, category A is too broad as it DISCUSS; try to subdivide 3 Noted. See
434 T
includes scenarios ranging from "very likely to unlikely" to stay category A
comment SPM-
1
below 2 C (see column 8 and FN 7). It is suggested to split this
421.
category into a new Cat A, that includes scenarios at least likely to
stay below 2 C. The remaining scenarios should form a new
Category B. The former categories B to E should become new
categories C to F accordingly. The number of scenarios in this
category (16 scenarios, see column 6) seems sufficient to allow for
a split.
(Government of Germany)
Will be done by Ch 3
(3)
SPM- 5 A 6 0 0 0 Table SPM 1: Class A covers a huge range of concentration levels See A-434
435 T
which dillutes any insights that can be gained from it with respect
1
to probability of staying below 2 C or change in global emissions in
2050. Should be split into at least two subcategories with 450 as
breaking point. What about stabilisation levels below 375 ppmv
CO2-eq. They should be added as well Class 0. Add reference to
Table 3.12 p. 109
(Government of Germany)
SPM- 5 A 6 1 0 0 Table SPM 1: In an overall very useful table, the ranges of See A-434
436 T
stabilisation levels at the low end (Class A) is so wide that the
1
results are not helpful. A probabiity of "very likely to unlikely"
does not give very useful information to policymakers. I woudl
suggest disaggregating the first row (Class A) into two categories.
(Harald Winkler, University of Cape Town)
SPM- 5 A 6 1 0 0 category E, 10th column: add note that range smaller than D is ACC
437 T
caused by smaller number of studies?
1
(Rob Swart, MNP)
SPM- 5 A 6 1 0 0 Table SPM 1: I think it would be helpful to divide the broad range See A-434
Page 107 of 348