30.01.2013 Views

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

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

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

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Chapter-<br />

Comment<br />

<strong>SPM</strong>-<br />

619<br />

<strong>SPM</strong>-<br />

620<br />

para<br />

Batch<br />

From Page<br />

From Line<br />

To Page<br />

To line<br />

<strong>Comments</strong><br />

IPCC WGIII Fourth Assessment Report, Se<strong>co</strong>nd Order Draft<br />

change damages and other <strong>co</strong>-benefits is a laudable goal, such a<br />

<strong>co</strong>mparison is <strong>co</strong>mplicated by inherent uncertainties in predicting<br />

benefits and the methods of relating longer-term benefits to nearerterm<br />

<strong>co</strong>sts.” Clarify text U.S. Government<br />

(Government of U.S. Department of State)<br />

8 A 8 17 0 0 That something is very <strong>co</strong>mplex is not a very informative<br />

assessment. Can't a more daring statement be made? E.g., that the<br />

number, size, varied nature and sometimes subjective (e.g. dis<strong>co</strong>unt<br />

rate) character of the uncertainties in determining <strong>co</strong>sts and benefits<br />

make a quantitative <strong>co</strong>mparison not meaningful? This was basically<br />

the SAR <strong>co</strong>nclusion. Such a statement would not deny the<br />

usefulness of a more qualitative CBA. The current formulation may<br />

suggest that as we do more research, uncertainties would be<br />

reduced and a meaningful quantitative CBA be<strong>co</strong>mes possible. A<br />

more modest change would be to add " and involves many<br />

subjective assumptions" right after "<strong>co</strong>mplex".<br />

(Rob Swart, MNP)<br />

8 A 8 17 8 17 Insert reference to section [3.5] at end of first sentence. If any one<br />

sentence in the report is to be <strong>co</strong>nsidered unambigously true, this is<br />

it. However, the reference should be to the section where this is<br />

most <strong>co</strong>mprehensively discussed which is section 3.5. This<br />

reference will then show in bold.<br />

(Pat Finnegan, Grian)<br />

8 A 8 17 8 17 It’s very clear, No further research needed?<br />

Expert Review of Se<strong>co</strong>nd-Order-Draft<br />

Confidential, Do Not Cite or Quote<br />

Response suggested by <strong>co</strong><strong>chair</strong>s<br />

See A-612<br />

See A-612<br />

<strong>SPM</strong>-<br />

See A-612<br />

621<br />

(Juan F Llanes-Regueiro, Havana University)<br />

<strong>SPM</strong>- 8 A 8 17 8 21 This § <strong>co</strong>vers a very important issue, and the reader would<br />

See A-612<br />

622<br />

appreciate more information.<br />

(Aviel VERBRUGGEN, University of Antwerp)<br />

<strong>SPM</strong>- 8 A 8 18 8 18 Replace estimating by <strong>co</strong>sting<br />

See A-612<br />

623<br />

(Government of France)<br />

<strong>SPM</strong>- 8 B 8 18 8 0 “…impacts…and environmental and health impacts (or are these See A-612<br />

136<br />

understood to be included in “non-market”?” U.S. Government<br />

(Government of U.S. Department of State)<br />

<strong>SPM</strong>- 8 B 8 19 8 19 … calculation TO the assumptions … See A-612<br />

Action<br />

for<br />

chapter<br />

Considerations<br />

by the writing<br />

team<br />

Page 160 of 348

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!