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

Chapter-
Comment
SPM-
634
SPM-
635
SPM-
636
SPM-
637
SPM-
638
SPM-
639
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Confidential, Do Not Cite or Quote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
0 A 8 22 9 1
(VARET jacques, French Geological Survey)
Add a figure in order to show that the peak for oil and gas resources
do well occur in the period considered (see proposed figure, from J.
Varet, Futuribles 2005).
(VARET jacques, French Geological Survey)
See A-633
7 A 8 22 0 0 Footnote 4: It might be worth adding that (to my knowledge) most
of these top-down models also assume perfect substitutability
between sectors, and no transaction or transition costs.
(Andy Reisinger, TSU IPCC Synthesis Report)
ACC; add to caption fig 5
7 A 8 24 0 0 Footnote 5: Include in the main text. This is an important
ACC; add annual GDP growth
alternative metric to "loss of GDP".
(Harald Winkler, University of Cape Town)
rate impact between brackets
7 A 8 0 0 0 Figure SPM.5
See A-593
F
The model of E3MG showing the negative value of GDP losses
5
presumes a mechanism that the larger carbon tax is imposed, the
larger investments may take place by the revenue obtained through
the carbon tax, and then employment increase and GDP increase
will follow. In reality the carbon tax will work to diminish
economic activities because of the higher energy prices, and GDP
in total will be decreased. However, the model does not consider
these effects. The model presumptions could be justified for short
time periods; however, for a long time span such as up to 2050 and
2100, the presumed mechanism can never justified. For these
reason, we strongly recommend you to delete this model results in
Figure SPM.5 and together with relevant reference in the text.
(Government of Japan)
7 A 8 0 0 0 Figure SPM.5
REJ; too complex
F
Describing GDP loss in terms of proportion can be misleading as it
5
seems to give the wrong perception that the loss is rather small.
We suggest to add the information on "net present value (NPV) of
abatement costs" as in TS, Figure TS 15(b).
(Government of Japan)
7 A 8 0 0 0 figure SPM.5: suggest to turn the x-axis as lower stabilisation levels UNCLEAR
F
imply higher costs
Action
for
chapter
Considerations
by the writing
team
Page 164 of 348