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

Chapter-
Comment
SPM-
540
SPM-
541
SPM-
542
SPM-
543
SPM-
544
para
6
F
4
6
F
4
6
F
4
6
F
4
6
F
4
Batch
From Page
From Line
To Page
To line
Comments
IPCC WGIII Fourth Assessment Report, Second Order Draft
A 7 25 0 0 Fig SPM.4: When looking at the small contribution from other
renewables (especially in the MESSAGE model), I doubt if the
applied models can calculate with the stimulating effects on
employment from renewable energy use, with their positive effects
on the local economy (see also my comment in chapter 3, page 60,
Fig 3.27) It seems that the numbers and data from SPM.4 are not
from a scenario but fit to a special case without any entitlement for
general validity.
(Manfred Treber, Germanwatch)
A 7 25 0 0 Fig SPM 4: please change the first explanation to "Energy
efficiency & conservation" as efficiency has more effects than
energy conservation
(Manfred Treber, Germanwatch)
A 7 25 0 0 Figure SPM 4 this appeared to be controversial and is linked to
particular scenarios - not sure it is needed to illustrate the point
(Ann Gardiner, AEA Technology)
A 7 25 0 0 Fig SPM-4. The baseline from which these reductions are made
isn't specified.
(Paul Baer, EcoEquity)
A 7 25 7 25 Figure SPM.4: It is straining credulity that over the next 100 years
the mitigation potential of ‘other’ renewables (solar, wind,
geothermal, etc) is so marginal that we’re seemingly better off
planting trees than changing our energy supply to renewables, and I
object to this figure which policy makers will surely interpret as we
might as well not develop renewable energy technologies at all. I
note that the figure builds on unpublished research (in press, as of
September still unpublished). What assurance can we have that the
figure reflects scientific consensus when the scientific community
has not had any opportunity to reflect on it? Perhaps there are good
reasons why the mitigation potential may be so low, but it seems to
me to contradict the volumes of research showing very large
technical potentials for renewables (see below). Contrast this with
AR4 chapter four, specifically Table 4.4.2 which shows a technical
potential of hundreds of thousands of EJ for solar, wind, and
Expert Review of Second-Order-Draft
Confidential, Do Not Cite or Quote
Response suggested by cochairs
See A-434; models are cost
mimimisation models
Action
for
chapter
Considerations
by the writing
team
Noted. More
models will be
added.
(4)
REJ; is ok Rejected. It is
clear enough.
(4)
See A-434 See comment
SPM 434 A.
ACC; add to caption Accepted. Add
to caption.
See A-434 and 537 See SPM 434 A
and SPM 537 A.
(4)
(4)
(4)
Page 139 of 348