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

Chapter-
Comment
SPM-
236
SPM-
237
SPM-
238
SPM-
239
SPM-
240
SPM-
241
SPM-
242
para
1
F
3
1
F
3
1
F
3
1
F
3
1
F
3
1
F
3
1
F
3
Batch
From Page
From Line
To Page
To line
Comments
IPCC WGIII Fourth Assessment Report, Second Order Draft
A 3 11 0 0
ffrom the same sources, should be added for balance.
(Harald Winkler, University of Cape Town)
figure SPM.3:suggest to mention when the shift 50%-50% share of
total emisions between Annex I and non Annex I countries occured.
In the TAR, Annex I countries were emitting more than 50% of
total emissions.
(Faouzi Senhaji, I.A.V. Hassan II (GERERE))
A 3 11 0 0 figure SPM.3: add "of total emissions" to " 53.6%" (the
percentage here is not clear)
(Faouzi Senhaji, I.A.V. Hassan II (GERERE))
A 3 11 0 12 About Figure SPM.3. What is "Annex I: 46.4% Non Annex I:
53.6%"?
(Toshihiko Masui, National Institute for Environmental Studies)
A 3 11 0 0 "JANZ" in Figure SPM.3 is not a commonly used term. Need
clarification.
(Koji Kadono, Global Industrial and Social Progress Research
Institute(GISPRI))
A 3 11 3 12 In figure SPM.3, do the per capita emissions given cover all
greenhouse gas emissions, including those from deforestation, or
are they just energy-related? Either way, the caption should make it
explicit what they are.
(Government of UK)
A 3 11 3 12 SPM footnote: Per capita data can be misleading. It does not make
the distinction between the emissions associated with actual per
capita energy use, and the emissions associated with the energy
supply service of one economy for the use of another.
(Government of Environment Canada)
A 3 11 3 11 figure SPM.3, comment: this grouping suggests all annex I
countries have per capita emissions higher than all non-annex I
countries, which is misleading; also it does not distinguish between
KP ratifyers and non-ratifiyers, which would be illustrative for the
impact of policies; suggest to make the following groupings:
usa/aus (annex II, non KP ratifyers), EU annex II, other annex II
(jap/can/nor/nzl/ice), other annex I (EiTs: belarus/bul/croa/cze
Expert Review of Second-Order-Draft
Confidential, Do Not Cite or Quote
Response suggested by cochairs
Action
for
chapter
Considerations
by the writing
team
REJ, too detailed for SPM 1 Agree with TSU
(1)
ACC 1 ACC
(1)
See A-235, 237 1 Will be
improved
(1)
ACC 1 Will be
improved
(1)
ACC; clarify caption 1 Will be
improved
(1)
ACC; clarify in caption that
these are “source based” data as
used in UNFCCC, not
consumption based
REJ; too complicated and too
sensitive. But modify wording
in para 2.
1 REJ: outside
scope of
Chapter 1
(1)
Agree with TSU
(1)
Page 61 of 348