date: Fri, 22 Oct 1999 11:21:18 +0200 from: Nebojsa NAKICENOVIC subject: Re: Talk in Austria to: Mike Hulme Dear Mike, Thanks for the quick response. I am afraid that the meeting is indeed on 28-30 October. Please, ask Sarah or Geoff if one of them would have time/interest to join us next week. If the answer is affirmative, I will get in touch with Austrian organizers to establish a direct contact so that you and I get out of the loop (I have both Sarah's and Geoff's email addresses). Thanks for the help on this matter. There is little new on the substance of SRES. We did not receive the government reviews yet, TSU is collating them right now. In a week or two I expect to know more. However, one thing appears to be clear already now - the report is likely to be controversial in the US. Some influential people there would like to see high sulfur and high GHG emissions probably connected with a single baseline that has no storyline (back to the old ways). However, I am not sure right now that they will be successful. In fact, I have quite a confidence that they will not be able to damage SRES on substantive issues. Unfortunately, they might have more luck with damaging the process itself. The problem is that there has been substantial press coverage of SRES (e.g. New Scientist, 18 Sept.; www.newscientist.com) etc. As you can imagine, I am very upset about these unnecessary leakages. Basically, I expect the claim to be made that early release of SRES findings, e.g. markers through the web and various articles, is against the IPCC rules that say that IPCC reports need to be approved first. My point of view is that individual research groups participating in IPCC activities must have the right to use and publish the background materials developed for IPCC assessments (especially when this work is not sponsored financially by IPCC). It is also clear that draft reports themselves should not be leaked or released prior to IPCC approval. In contrast, the background materials (such as the scenarios themselves) cannot wait for approval. Otherwise, the next assessment might be a non-starter. Imagine, if the GCM groups were not allowed to publish anything about their modeling runs before the IPCC approval! Well, our situation is not much different. I cannot say to our IIASA sponsors that we must wait for IPCC approval before we publish or report on the research they have supported (and IPCC has not). Cheers, Naki At 06:29 PM 10/21/99 +0100, Mike Hulme wrote: >Hi Naki. I have actually been in an IPCC meeting here in Norwich >yesterday, today and tomorrow - the Climate Scenario Task Group meeting. >You will no doubt get some feedback about it. > >Do you mean 28-30 October 1999? If so, I cannot make it since we have our >own 'high-level' seminar those days in Plymouth UK. Both John Mitchell and >I are speaking. I can ask Sarah but I doubt she would do it. Geoff >Jenkins from the Hadley Centre would give an excellent talk. I can ask him >if you wish. > >If you mean some other date, then yes I would be happy to help out. > >I will be picking up my email tomorrow or else I should be around in my >office between 1300-1500 hrs (UK time) on Friday. > >Best wishes, > >Mike > >p.s. is there any quick feedback (i.e., before we close Friday pm) you can >give our scenarios group on how the SRES review process is going and what >changes may be made to the Marker emissions scenarios? > >At 17:34 21/10/99 +0200, you wrote: >> >>Dear Mike, >> >>The Austrian Academy of Sciences is organizing a relatively high-level >>seminar here close to Vienna, 28-30 September. I will talk about energy and >>GHG emissions (but not about SRES). The organizers are looking for someone >>to talk on climate change, ucertainties and modeling issues. (They just >>called me; I believe that they originally invited Hasselmann to give the >>talk in German but he apparently cannot attend any longer.) So I tried to >>call you today to see if you are interested. Please let me know one way or >>the other if you receive this email. >> >>They would pay a honorarium of ATS 10,000 (about 500 pounds), travel and >>accommodation, etc. I will be there Friday through Saturday (29-30) so that >>it would be nice to meet and talk about SRES and other matters. It would be >>also fine if you could come only for one day. If you cannot, perhaps you >>could suggest someone else, e.g. Sarah Raper or John Mitchell? >> >>Regards, Naki >> >***************************************************************************** >Dr Mike Hulme >Reader in Climatology tel: +44 1603 593162 >Climatic Research Unit fax: +44 1603 507784 >School of Environmental Science email: m.hulme@uea.ac.uk >University of East Anglia web site: http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/~mikeh/ >Norwich NR4 7TJ >***************************************************************************** > Annual mean temperature in Central England for 1999 > is currently about +1.3 deg C above the 1961-90 average > *************************************************** > The global-mean surface air temperature anomaly for 1998 > was +0.57 deg C above the 1961-90 average, the warmest year yet recorded >***************************************************************************** > >