AR5 Review Comments
AR5 Review Comments
Report by UK
First Order Draft, Drivers, Trends and Mitigation:
UK
I think this table is still to be completed (?) so I have not included full comments but here are a couple: 1) Will sources supporting each entry be given? 2) what is FE? 3) could be better described as carbon rater than system efficiency? 4) is the entry for CHP is the wrong row?
View full comment by Nina Meddings...
First Order Draft, Drivers, Trends and Mitigation:
UK
source needed
View full comment by Nina Meddings...
First Order Draft, Drivers, Trends and Mitigation:
UK
source needed
View full comment by Nina Meddings...
First Order Draft, Drivers, Trends and Mitigation:
UK
source needed
View full comment by Nina Meddings...
First Order Draft, Drivers, Trends and Mitigation:
UK
source needed
View full comment by Nina Meddings...
First Order Draft, Drivers, Trends and Mitigation:
UK
source needed
View full comment by Nina Meddings...
First Order Draft, Drivers, Trends and Mitigation:
UK
source needed
View full comment by Nina Meddings...
First Order Draft, Drivers, Trends and Mitigation:
UK
source needed
View full comment by Nina Meddings...
First Order Draft, Drivers, Trends and Mitigation:
UK
no mention in text (only briefly in table) of the link between energy efficiency and affordability - this is becoming increasingly important with even developed countries having large numbers of households in fuel poverty (e.g. UK around 20%). With rising fuel prices, energy efficiency measures can help reduce fuel poverty. Also relevant for transport as with rising petrol/diesel prices, sales of efficient cars have increased to maintain transport affordability.
View full comment by Ute Collier...
First Order Draft, Drivers, Trends and Mitigation:
UK
There is more literature on co-benefits that should be referenced here. Also reductions in surface ozone are worth mentioning here and the impacts on plants and their productivity. Some of the health benefits are listed in 5.10.1.2.
View full comment by Annela Anger-Kraavi...
First Order Draft, Drivers, Trends and Mitigation:
UK
this section does not include any economic co-benefits
View full comment by Annela Anger-Kraavi...
First Order Draft, Drivers, Trends and Mitigation:
UK
The analysis of behavioural change is very shallow, lacking good social science practice of tracing a whole range of causal factors to try to identify the most significant and those that can be effectively addressed. Literature suggested in my previous comment presents a range of factors that should be added to the analysis.
View full comment by Mark Charlesworth...
First Order Draft, Drivers, Trends and Mitigation: From Page 0
UK
This chapter represents well the past trends and drivers of GHGs, but the mitigation aspect of the chapter is not properly covered - especially in terms of mitigating future GHG emissions
View full comment by Annela Anger-Kraavi...
First Order Draft, Drivers, Trends and Mitigation: From Page 0
UK
This is a very data-rich chapter, with rigorous analysis. It might be useful for the authors to step back and try to think about the important “so what” messages.
Curiously, amidst all the data, I think the chapter misses out a fundamentally important diagram (and associated set of issues), namely the data captured in a very aggregated form in the FOD Chapter 14 Figure 14-12 on trends in per-capita emissions vs per-capita GDP. I think this format captures several impor
View full comment by Michael Grubb...
First Order Draft, Drivers, Trends and Mitigation: From Page 12 , Line 23 To Page 12 , Line 23
UK
Why is it a given that uncertainty for CH4 and N2O will be larger?
View full comment by Nina Meddings...
First Order Draft, Drivers, Trends and Mitigation: From Page 12 , Line 8 To Page 12 , Line 8
UK
Combustion of fossil fuels takes place in buildings as well as power plants and transport
View full comment by Nina Meddings...
First Order Draft, Drivers, Trends and Mitigation: From Page 29 , Line 32 To Page 30 , Line 1
UK
Did not understand paragraph
View full comment by Nina Meddings...
First Order Draft, Drivers, Trends and Mitigation: From Page 30 , Line 5 To Page 30 , Line 6
UK
I'd suggest explaining the system boundary problem
View full comment by Nina Meddings...
First Order Draft, Drivers, Trends and Mitigation: From Page 31 , Line 34 To Page 31 , Line 36
UK
Sentence is not clear to me / appears to contradict itself
View full comment by Nina Meddings...
First Order Draft, Drivers, Trends and Mitigation: From Page 32 , Line 25 To Page 32 , Line 27
UK
Not clear if "lifestyle and popoulation density" belong to the start or end of the sentence (presumably the former?). House type is a nominal variable so not clear how it has a directional effect on energy use (also house type is mentioned here in the concluding paragraph but is not discussed earlier in the sub-section...)
View full comment by Nina Meddings...
First Order Draft, Drivers, Trends and Mitigation: From Page 32 , Line 7 To Page 32 , Line 10
UK
is this really an unexplored area? In the UK, this has been looked at e.g. in the evaluation of energy efficiency policy measures. See e.g. [http://www.decc.gov.uk/assets/decc/11/funding-support/3339-evaluation-of-the-delivery-and-uptake-of-the-carbo.pdf]. This directly contradicts the finding of the Greek study - e.g. page 29 in the priority group of the over 70s, it was easy to get people to opt for energy efficiency measures, whereas younger age groups (often living in ren
View full comment by Ute Collier...
First Order Draft, Drivers, Trends and Mitigation: From Page 32
UK
See my opening remark about per-capita GDP versus per-capita emissions. This section would seem the natural place to include a more disaggregated version of the Figure 14-12, and that would start to give a “story” to accompany the mass of data already here. Whether or not the interpretation in our book (Chapter 1) is right, or the somewhat more negative view in the FOD Chapter 14 (see my comments to Ch.14), is for the authors to judge.
Since production vs consumption
View full comment by Michael Grubb...
First Order Draft, Drivers, Trends and Mitigation: From Page 36 , Line 32 To Page 36 , Line 32
UK
Meaning not clear to me
View full comment by Nina Meddings...
First Order Draft, Drivers, Trends and Mitigation: From Page 39 , Line 12 To Page 39 , Line 12
UK
I think the words "the growth in" should be deleted?
View full comment by Nina Meddings...
First Order Draft, Drivers, Trends and Mitigation: From Page 39 , Line 40 To Page 40 , Line 7
UK
Not my area of expertise; however I suspect this finding will attract some scepticism / may not apply in more recent years (e.g. given Chinese exports). Not sure I wholly agree with the conclusion that "countries will trade with those able to produce products more [energy] efficiently.." as many other factors (labour costs etc) will affect trade (unless these factors are accounted for in the methodology?)
View full comment by Nina Meddings...
First Order Draft, Drivers, Trends and Mitigation: From Page 40 , Line 1 To Page 40 , Line 1
UK
What "country differences" are being referred to?
View full comment by Nina Meddings...
First Order Draft, Drivers, Trends and Mitigation: From Page 45 , Line 34 To Page 45
UK
This sentence indicates that oil is now the dominant fossil fuel, replacing coal. However, coal is still by far the dominant fossil fuel in terms of total electricity production. See p. 24: http://www.iea.org/textbase/nppdf/free/2010/key_stats_2010.pdf
View full comment by Tracy Lane...
First Order Draft, Drivers, Trends and Mitigation: From Page 45 , Line 5 To Page 45 , Line 5
UK
Fuel mix may not determine energy use but I would argue that by definition it determines CO2 emissions. Perhaps historically the correlation has been fairly weak, however in future it would be expected to be stronger e.g. With a greater share of renewables.
View full comment by Nina Meddings...
First Order Draft, Drivers, Trends and Mitigation: From Page 48 , Line 15 To Page 48 , Line 16
UK
Sentence is not clear to me
View full comment by Nina Meddings...
First Order Draft, Drivers, Trends and Mitigation: From Page 48 , Line 26 To Page 48 , Line 27
UK
Sentence is not clear to me - cars are Light Duty Vehicles too.
View full comment by Nina Meddings...
First Order Draft, Drivers, Trends and Mitigation: From Page 49 , Line 33
UK
emissions from buildings are not just from houses and offices but include all sorts of other buildings e.g. retail, warehouses, data centres, public sector buildings (schools etc)
View full comment by Ute Collier...
First Order Draft, Drivers, Trends and Mitigation: From Page 50 , Line 1 To Page 50 , Line 1
UK
"1990s" not "1900s"
View full comment by Nina Meddings...
First Order Draft, Drivers, Trends and Mitigation: From Page 50 , Line 14
UK
is it largely electricity use? Certainly in countries with a high heating demand (e.g. central and northern Europe) it's actually fossil fuels for heating. Worth making the distinction here, may be supported with a few examples.
View full comment by Ute Collier...
First Order Draft, Drivers, Trends and Mitigation: From Page 50 , Line 14 To Page 50 , Line 15
UK
Reference needed for statement about electricity use
View full comment by Nina Meddings...
First Order Draft, Drivers, Trends and Mitigation: From Page 50 , Line 2
UK
is this supposed to read 1970s and 1980s (instead of 1900s)? Need to explain why economic decline in the EIT affected buildings emissions - is it about falling service sector emissions? Energy prices increased in the EIT and that may have had an impact on residential sector emissions. Plus there's been quite a lot of retrofitting of buildings and district heating systems which were notoriously inefficient.
View full comment by Ute Collier...
First Order Draft, Drivers, Trends and Mitigation: From Page 50 , Line 28 To Page 50 , Line 35
UK
References needed
View full comment by Nina Meddings...
First Order Draft, Drivers, Trends and Mitigation: From Page 50 , Line 3
UK
Chapter 9 says buildings account for 32% of global final energy and 23% of global primary energy use. Where does the 40% come from and does it refer to primary or final energy use? Which figures are correct?There needs to be consistency between chapters!
View full comment by Ute Collier...
First Order Draft, Drivers, Trends and Mitigation: From Page 50 , Line 35 To Page 50 , Line 36
UK
Need to have a date and clarify potential here, i.e. 30% is cost-effective potential by 2030 (see chapter 9). Technical potential is much higher. For which year is the IPCC (2007) potential?
View full comment by Ute Collier...
First Order Draft, Drivers, Trends and Mitigation: From Page 50 , Line 43 To Page 51 , Line 1
UK
suggest re-naming "manufacturing industries and constrauction" as "Other manufcaturing industries and construction" (i.e. other than chemicals etc, given that on p.51 lines 7-16 chemicals (and others) are then described as being part of manufacturing). The reason that this category is the largest contributor is presumably just because it is more aggregated?
View full comment by Nina Meddings...
First Order Draft, Drivers, Trends and Mitigation: From Page 50 , Line 8 To Page 50 , Line 11
UK
Why has the US been singled out here? Other countries have interesting emission statistics for buildings too. Would be more interesting to have e.g. some OECD or EU figures vs developing country figures here. The fact that US building emissions exceeds the combined emissions of Japan, France and the UK doesn't necessarily tell the reader much - the population of those three countries is about 60 mill lower than those of the US and there's a lot of difference in all sectors. E
View full comment by Ute Collier...
First Order Draft, Drivers, Trends and Mitigation: From Page 51 , Line 17 To Page 51 , Line 18
UK
should this sentence go before lines 15-16? (I think it would make more sense that way)
View full comment by Nina Meddings...
First Order Draft, Drivers, Trends and Mitigation: From Page 51 , Line 2 To Page 51 , Line 2
UK
does the 16% growth refer to the period 1970 - 2002?
View full comment by Nina Meddings...
First Order Draft, Drivers, Trends and Mitigation: From Page 51 , Line 21 To Page 51 , Line 24
UK
More accurately "The drivers for growth of GHG in industry....." ? Discussion is rather brief - could more space be devoted to it?
View full comment by Nina Meddings...
First Order Draft, Drivers, Trends and Mitigation: From Page 53 , Line 17 To Page 53 , Line 18
UK
This sentence appears rather randomly
View full comment by Nina Meddings...
First Order Draft, Drivers, Trends and Mitigation: From Page 54 , Line 7 To Page 54 , Line 10
UK
would this be better represented in a chart?
View full comment by Nina Meddings...
First Order Draft, Drivers, Trends and Mitigation: From Page 55 , Line 12 To Page 55 , Line 16
UK
does not appear to follow from earlier part of the paragraph
View full comment by Nina Meddings...
First Order Draft, Drivers, Trends and Mitigation: From Page 56 , Line 32 To Page 40
UK
References needed
View full comment by Nina Meddings...
First Order Draft, Drivers, Trends and Mitigation: From Page 56 , Line 48 To Page 49
UK
References needed
View full comment by Nina Meddings...
First Order Draft, Drivers, Trends and Mitigation: From Page 57 , Line 1 To Page 6
UK
References needed
View full comment by Nina Meddings...
First Order Draft, Drivers, Trends and Mitigation: From Page 59 , Line 29 To Page 30
UK
Meaning not clear to me
View full comment by Nina Meddings...
First Order Draft, Drivers, Trends and Mitigation: From Page 6 , Line 17 To Page 8 , Line 41
UK
There appears at least a tension between page 6 '17 Economic growth, in turn, is related to the level of consumption of goods and services; once the level of consumption is isolated as an individual driver of emissions, it is by far the most significant driver in both developed and developing countries (high agreement, robust evidence). This is the conclusion of numerous studies that have undertaken a structural decomposition analysis to identify the role of different driver
View full comment by Mark Charlesworth...
First Order Draft, Drivers, Trends and Mitigation: From Page 60 , Line 31 To Page 32
UK
worth mentioning possible constraints on large scale BECCS (availability of resources/land etc; fact that emissions may actually increase if appropriate land use controls are not in place)
View full comment by Nina Meddings...
First Order Draft, Drivers, Trends and Mitigation: From Page 60 , Line 39 To Page 60 , Line 43
UK
is this relevant to infrastructure?
View full comment by Nina Meddings...
First Order Draft, Drivers, Trends and Mitigation: From Page 60 , Line 47 To Page 60 , Line 48
UK
comment of Germany and Japan appears rather randomly and does not relate to infrastructure. (It might fit better at the end of the first paragraph on p.61?)
View full comment by Nina Meddings...
First Order Draft, Drivers, Trends and Mitigation: From Page 61 , Line 1 To Page 61 , Line 5
UK
is this relevant to infrastructure? Also the comment on highway vehicles is not clear to me.
View full comment by Nina Meddings...
First Order Draft, Drivers, Trends and Mitigation: From Page 61 , Line 17 To Page 61 , Line 18
UK
Meaning not clear to me
View full comment by Nina Meddings...
First Order Draft, Drivers, Trends and Mitigation: From Page 61 , Line 40 To Page 61 , Line 40
UK
caveat: lower energy will lead to lower air emissions IF energy source is carbon (combustion) based
View full comment by Nina Meddings...
First Order Draft, Drivers, Trends and Mitigation: From Page 61
UK
This is not an area I have much expertise but I have had cause to review some of the literature recently. I was struck by the apparent scale of local air pollution impacts and apparent “co-beneifts”, despite the big reductions in eg. sulphur referred to (eg. p.62 lines 14-23). I’d suggest that this section should look more closely at the environment / health co-benefits including the efforts to put quantitative values on these, to which we refer in Chapter 1 of Grubb,
View full comment by Michael Grubb...
First Order Draft, Drivers, Trends and Mitigation: From Page 62 , Line 14 To Page 62 , Line 43
UK
not clear to me how this relates to health benefits
View full comment by Nina Meddings...
First Order Draft, Drivers, Trends and Mitigation: From Page 62 , Line 32 To Page 62 , Line 39
UK
not clear to me how this relates to transport safety/economic co-benefits (most of it seems more relevant to the health co-benefits section)
View full comment by Nina Meddings...
First Order Draft, Drivers, Trends and Mitigation: From Page 62
UK
This might be a place to consider the health co-benefits and their effects on the macroeconomy. See for example Keogh-Brown and colleagues submitted for publication - draft paper could be shared if there is interest. Also some policies such as those that promote active travel can avert health service costs Jarrett J, Woodcock J, Griffiths UK, Chalabi Z, Edwards P, Roberts I, Haines A Effect of incresing active travel in urban England and Wales on National Health Service cost
View full comment by Andy Haines...
First Order Draft, Drivers, Trends and Mitigation: From Page 63 , Line 14 To Page 63 , Line 14
UK
what does the 77% refer to?
View full comment by Nina Meddings...
First Order Draft, Drivers, Trends and Mitigation: From Page 66
UK
Its very good to have this section on the complexities of using co-benefits. However, two points not fully recognised here: (i) the idea of “separating” policies to deal with each issue individually makes apparent sense economically but not if either solutions may be integrated, or policy responses involve new investment (as is often the case) in which case integrated investment to deliver multiple benefits is often the most cost-effective response. (ii) it is entirely
View full comment by Michael Grubb...
First Order Draft, Drivers, Trends and Mitigation: From Page 67 , Line 7 To Page 67 , Line 8
UK
Meaning not clear to me
View full comment by Nina Meddings...
First Order Draft, Drivers, Trends and Mitigation: From Page 71 , Line 24 To Page 71 , Line 24
UK
The use of the term 'wise' is welcome and points to a virtue epistemology which incorporates the predictive elements of 'scienctistic' epistemology but also incorporates more humble elements such as precaution.
View full comment by Mark Charlesworth...