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

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Chapter-<br />

Comment<br />

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

781<br />

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

192<br />

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

782<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 />

dealing with carbon leakage than with oil prices, so including both<br />

topics equally under the line "recent literature <strong>co</strong>nfirms the<br />

<strong>co</strong>nclusions of the TAR" would not be accurate. It would make<br />

sense to separate out "carbon leakage" and "oil prices" into two<br />

separate sentences for making their respective <strong>co</strong>mparisons to the<br />

extent of new literature since the TAR. Sentences along the lines<br />

of......<br />

1) With respect to carbon leakage, not only does "recent literature<br />

<strong>co</strong>nfirm the <strong>co</strong>nclusions of the TAR" there are new findings<br />

indicating that "widespread relocation is unlikely".<br />

2) With respect to the effect of mitigation on oil prices, would<br />

suggest referring directly to the underlying report that states<br />

"literature has hardly advanced since the TAR" (pg. 76 line 46-47)<br />

which is far from "<strong>co</strong>nfirming". To be <strong>co</strong>nsistent with the large<br />

uncertainties, many assumptions made and relative lack of new<br />

literature, would suggest the following change: "oil exporting<br />

<strong>co</strong>untries MAY expect lower oil price and GDP loss but results<br />

depend STRONGLY on assumptions about Annex I policy and oil<br />

exporting <strong>co</strong>untry <strong>response</strong>, and new findings indicate that<br />

revenues from oil exports are now much higher than assumed in<br />

earlier studies"<br />

(Government of Environment Canada)<br />

11 A 11 30 11 31 Will GDP loss be reduced or increased for oil-exporting <strong>co</strong>untries?<br />

The answer may seem clear but should be stated. Perhaps - "lower<br />

oil prices, and GDP losses" would make the sentence clearer.<br />

(Government of Australia)<br />

11 B 11 31 11 31 … oil price and… SOME GDP loss ? (does "lower" apply to GDP<br />

?)<br />

(Jean-Pascal van YPERSELE, Université catholique de Louvain<br />

(Belgium))<br />

11 A 11 32 0 0 add uncertainty statement ((HM?)<br />

(Rob Swart, MNP)<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 />

Action<br />

for<br />

chapter<br />

Considerations<br />

by the writing<br />

team<br />

See A-780 See revised<br />

paras<br />

(11)<br />

ACC See revised<br />

paras<br />

(11)<br />

ACC ACC See<br />

revised paras<br />

(11)<br />

<strong>SPM</strong>- 11 A 11 32 11 32 add "However, various oil exporting <strong>co</strong>untries have promoted Prefer A-780 Prefer revised<br />

Page 208 of 348

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

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!