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

Chapter-
Comment
SPM-
116
SPM-
117
SPM-
118
SPM-
119
para
Batch
From Page
From Line
To Page
To line
Comments
IPCC WGIII Fourth Assessment Report, Second Order Draft
7 B 8 3 8 4 The statement in bold is rather trivial as a summary for this
paragraph: make this more specific. What is the range of costs (as
% of GDP) for various stabilisation levels. Then the sensitivities
can be explained in non-bold text.
(Government of European Community / European Commission)
7 B 8 3 8 8 The SPM should include a discussion clarifying the important
modeling assumptions that drive costs. U.S. Government
(Government of U.S. Department of State)
7 B 8 3 8 8 P. 8, lines 3-8 and n 5; and p.11, lines 19-23 and n 9 --- The
stabilization costs indicated in the SPM are (highly) suspect
because those costs are assessed against baselines that already
include large reductions in emissions attributable to technological
change, the adoption of which has not been considered in the
mitigation cost analysis (or has simply been treated as involving
zero cost). Moreover, many cost estimates are based on models
that assume a carbon-free “backstop” energy technology(ies) that
may (does) not yet exist, a technology that is often identified as
“generic”. The “backstop” technology assumption can substantially
reduce mitigation costs. The SPM should include a discussion
clarifying the important modeling assumptions that drive costs.
U.S. Government
(Government of U.S. Department of State)
7 B 8 3 8 4 Is the statement necessarily true for lower levels of participation?
May make it more expensive for those who participate, but total
cost may be fixed. Clarify that the costs being referred to are global
totals. Costs in different countries may indeed be lower if the
countries do not participate. U.S. Government
(Government of U.S. Department of State)
Expert Review of Second-Order-Draft
Confidential, Do Not Cite or Quote
Response suggested by cochairs
studies to use) and outcomes
may change if full joint analysis
is done; also probably a good
idea to present 2030 outcomes
together with 2050 in figure 5b
REJ; this is a general summary;
details follow; point on
participation effect to be added
REJ; leave that to chapter/TS,
see also A-563
Identical A-562
TIA; clarify that this is about
global costs; statement is true:
the more countries participate
the lower the global costs; it is
not always true that the cost for
those that participate are lower,
because of effects of trade and
Action
for
chapter
Considerations
by the writing
team
(3)
Page 148 of 348