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
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 />
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 />
783 diversification of their e<strong>co</strong>nomies into other sectors to alleviate<br />
natural resource dependency."<br />
<strong>SPM</strong>-<br />
784<br />
<strong>SPM</strong>-<br />
193<br />
<strong>SPM</strong>-<br />
785<br />
<strong>SPM</strong>-<br />
786<br />
(Government of The Netherlands)<br />
11 A 11 32 11 34 What studies support the “new findings”? It is not clear on what<br />
studies they are referring to here; presumably that by Reinaud et al.<br />
is included. While Reinaud et al <strong>co</strong>ncluded that leakage would be<br />
lower than previously thought, it is also reported that “ambiguous<br />
results” warranting “further research”? Is this sufficient to support a<br />
new “finding”. U.S. Government<br />
(Government of U.S. Department of State)<br />
11 B 11 32 11 34 What studies support the “new findings”? The authors are not clear<br />
on what studies they are referring to here; presumably that by<br />
Reinaud et al. is included. While Reinaud et al <strong>co</strong>ncluded that<br />
leakage would be lower than previously thought, didn’t they also<br />
report “ambiguous results” warranting “further research”? Is this<br />
sufficient to support a new “finding”. U.S. Government<br />
(Government of U.S. Department of State)<br />
11 A 11 33 11 34 "... widespread relocation is unlikely ..." Such expressions are<br />
misleading in that it is clear that no installation will be dismantled<br />
in A and transfered to B to <strong>co</strong>ntinue its operations there. What is<br />
important is that there are practically no new investments e. g. in<br />
the EU but in Asia and elsewhere where energy intensive<br />
production does not face CO2 <strong>co</strong>nstraints, or at least very little.<br />
Investment decisions are driven by many factors but it should not<br />
be denied that as long as there is no truly international CO2 regime<br />
different climate policies in A and B do play a major role for<br />
energy intensive industry investments. Soothing expressions as in<br />
lines 33/34 do lead policy makers onto the wrong track.<br />
(Joachim Hein, BDI - Federation of German Industries)<br />
11 A 11 33 11 33 The statement "studies on the energy intensive industry indicate<br />
that widespread relocation is unlikely" needs to be qualified as<br />
some industries (e.g. aluminium) are seeing a trend towards some<br />
closure of existing capacity in OECD <strong>co</strong>untries and a marked<br />
expansion in non-OECD <strong>co</strong>untries (see attached<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 />
paras<br />
(11)<br />
See A-780 See revised<br />
paras<br />
(11)<br />
Identical A-784<br />
See A-780 See revised<br />
paras<br />
(11)<br />
DISCUSS<br />
See also A-780<br />
11 See revised<br />
paras<br />
(11)<br />
Page 209 of 348
Change language