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

Chapter-
Comment
SPM-
1129
SPM-
1130
SPM-
1131
SPM-
238
SPM-
1132
para
Batch
From Page
From Line
To Page
To line
Comments
IPCC WGIII Fourth Assessment Report, Second Order Draft
28 A 15 29 15 30
(Juan F Llanes-Regueiro, Havana University)
The observation (this is true for both energy and non-energy R&D)
that a given firm captures only a small fraction of the societal value
of R&D is not justification for government to do R&D rather than
the private sector. Suggest changing to “Societal benefits of R&D
generally far exceed the value captured by the private sector,
implying that government promotion of R&D is a public good.”
(Haroon Kheshgi, ExxonMobil Research and Engineering
Company)
28 A 15 29 15 30 Care needs to be taken to avoid giving the impression that
government RD&D expenditure is 'good' and private RD&D
expenditure 'bad'. The effectiveness of government RD&D
spending has often and long been criticised (the weakness of 'spinoff'
arguments, for instance). What is obvious is that both public
and private sector RD&D investment should ideally rise to help us
cope with the technological needs of the future.
(Michael Jefferson, World Renewable Energy Network &
Congresses)
28 A 15 29 15 29 Remove the full stop before the word "Public"
(Government of MALAWI)
28 B 15 29 15 31 Wouldn't it be useful to re-assess the full cost of government
support for nuclear energy (including hidden costs such as agreeing
to limited liability for accidents), and re-assess its real CO2displacement
potential? What if the money stranded in the nuclear
sector was used to promote real energy efficiency ?
(Jean-Pascal van YPERSELE, Université catholique de Louvain
(Belgium))
28 A 15 30 0 0 “However funding for energy research has been flat or declining for
over two decades. The level of R&D in energy technologies is low
compared with other industries, but massive changes will be
required to meet the long-term goals of CO2 mitigation, such as the
production of 500 EJ/year of non-CO2-emitting primary energy by
2100. Long-term, large scale, high-risk, high benefit energy
research is not rewarded in the private market, and must be
Expert Review of Second-Order-Draft
Confidential, Do Not Cite or Quote
Response suggested by cochairs
TIA in reformulating
REJ; that is not what is said in
para
ACC
REJ; policy prescriptive
REJ; SPM is not the place to
single out nuclear fusion
Action
for
chapter
Considerations
by the writing
team
Page 299 of 348