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 />

para<br />

in<br />

g<br />

<strong>SPM</strong>- 5<br />

354 he<br />

ad<br />

in<br />

g<br />

<strong>SPM</strong>- 5<br />

355 he<br />

ad<br />

in<br />

g<br />

<strong>SPM</strong>-61 5<br />

he<br />

ad<br />

in<br />

g<br />

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

356<br />

5<br />

he<br />

ad<br />

in<br />

g<br />

<strong>SPM</strong>-62 5<br />

he<br />

ad<br />

in<br />

g<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 />

A 5 2 5 2<br />

emissions).<br />

(Government of Australia)<br />

Need a justification of why stabilisation rate of 450ppmv is used.<br />

Are other scenarios <strong>co</strong>nsidered?<br />

(Government of Australia)<br />

A 5 2 5 2 replace "as low as around" with "around or below" since a number<br />

of scenarios assessed in ch. 3 show stabilisation lower than 450<br />

ppm eq.<br />

(Government of Germany)<br />

B 5 2 5 2 … as low as … : This is very subjective ! It gives the impression<br />

that 450 ppmv CO2-eq is the lowest stabilization level one <strong>co</strong>uld<br />

dream of. May I remind you that the SRES scenarios were designed<br />

with a "no climate policy" mandate, which means that many people<br />

erroneously think SRES B1 or B2 are the lowest imaginable<br />

scenarios. I suggest to say simply "even at levels around 450…".<br />

Please amend Note 3 ac<strong>co</strong>rdingly.<br />

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

(Belgium))<br />

A 5 3 5 3 replace "a range of" by "many" or "an important number"<br />

(Aviel VERBRUGGEN, University of Antwerp)<br />

B 5 3 5 3 … provided that a range of mitigaton technologies is developed … :<br />

does it mean it is not possible at all with existing technologies ?<br />

Mixing "further development" and "further implementation" in the<br />

same sentence might give the wrong message to policy-makers that<br />

a lot of technical development is needed to obtain this "technical<br />

feasibility", when what is mostly needed is probably<br />

implementation of the already existing techniques. In addition, this<br />

paragraph starts with "It is technically feasible to ...", which echoes<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 />

TIA; heading text to be deleted,<br />

but wording to be used for<br />

merging with para 6. In table?<br />

TIA; heading text to be deleted,<br />

but wording to be used for<br />

merging with para 6<br />

TIA; heading text to be deleted,<br />

but wording to be used for<br />

merging with para 6<br />

TIA; heading text to be deleted,<br />

but wording to be used for<br />

merging with para 6<br />

TIA; heading text to be deleted,<br />

but wording to be used for<br />

merging with para 6<br />

Action<br />

for<br />

chapter<br />

Considerations<br />

by the writing<br />

team<br />

Page 90 of 348

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

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!