Wednesday, April 25, 2012

3480.txt

cc: maria.noguer@metoffice.com, "Griggs, Dave" <dave.griggsatXYZxyzoffice.com>
date: Mon, 11 Mar 2002 09:53:07 +0000
from: "Mitchell, John FB (Hadley Centre)" <john.f.mitchellatXYZxyzoffice.com>
subject: RE: DDC criteria and WCRP
to: 'Mike Hulme' <m.hulmeatXYZxyz.ac.uk>, PARRYML@aol.com, john.f.mitchell@metoffice.com, cubaschatXYZxyzz.de

Hi Mike

I don't think WGCM/WCRP has any desire to be involved making up emissions
scenarios, or choosing from available scenarios from those already available
to go in the DDC, or what results are made available. But they are in a good
postion to to judge what models are likely to be unsuitable for climate
impacts studies.

The issue raised at the WGCM was a concern that IPCC ( through TGCIA) was
set up to assess research on anthropogenic climate change, not direct work
on climate modelling ( or for that matter climate impacts and the consequent
social and economic impacts). On the other hand, TGCIA embodies
representatives of all these areas, and as far as I know, currently provides
the only forum where the different disciplines can attempt to reconcile
there different approaches in order to improve the next IPCC report. We have
an opportunity to be seen not to be overstepping our remit on the climate
modelling side and I believe we should take. From a pragmatic point of view,
I don't think it will make a difference to what we do,

Your final concern is I believe a seperate issue- for what its worth I
suspect the climate modellers did not have enough influence on the the SRES
scenarios ( eg taking into account the range of radiative forcing to most
efficiently cover the range of climate response) and that we all lost out as
a result (in that there is not a good coverage of the scenarios for the
impacts community, and the runs were not great use in comparing with past
results, increasing our understanding or improving models ). Thats water
under the bridge, and I think we may do better with the stabilization
scnearios- this I think is where IPCC through TGCIA can help all aspects of
the climate change community.

We can talk about this further when we next meet
With best wishes
John

John F B Mitchell, Head of Modelling Climate Change
Met.Office, Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research
London Road, Bracknell, RG12 2SY UK
Tel +44 (0)1344 856613/6656 Fax+44 (0)1344 856912
E-mail john.f.mitchellatXYZxyzoffice.com
http://www.metoffice.com/research/hadleycentre

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mike Hulme [SMTP:m.hulme@uea.ac.uk]
> Sent: Friday, March 08, 2002 6:44 PM
> To: PARRYML@aol.com; john.f.mitchell@metoffice.com; cubaschatXYZxyzz.de
> Cc: maria.nogueratXYZxyzoffice.com
> Subject: Re: DDC criteria and WCRP
>
> I see the problem, but there may be a bigger issue here. While WGCM
> clearly are the best placed to advise on quality of models and criteria
> etc., they do so from a climate modelling perspective and not from a
> impacts/adaptation perspective. There are strong feelings in part of the
> international research community engaged in impacts/adaptation work that
> the climate modellers have too much influence in agenda-setting already.
> The TGCIA, made up of WGI, II and III people is one way to have a more
> balanced dialogue.
>
> I don't think I have a counter proposal, but I think TGCIA should be
> sensitive to this perception I've expressed. For example, who decides
> what types of experiments are run and how available are results? There is
> a feeling I&A researchers have to be content as passive recipients of
> whatever the climate modellers generate, whereas a more equal partnership
> is sought for.
>
> Mike
>
> At 05:26 07/03/02 -0500, PARRYMLatXYZxyz.com wrote:
>
>
> John:
> I would be happy with this proposal (see below); Mike and Ulrich:
> would you? Could you please reply to me and John. If we are all agreed
> then I suggest we proceed as John suggests.
> regards,
> Martin
>
>
> Subj: DDC criteria and WCRP
> Date: 6/3/2002 16:45:14 GMT Standard Time
> From: john.f.mitchellatXYZxyzoffice.com (Mitchell, John FB (Hadley
> Centre))
> To: PARRYMLatXYZxyz.com ('PARRYML@aol.com')
> CC: john.f.mitchellatXYZxyzoffice.com (Mitchell, John FB (Hadley
> Centre)), maria.nogueratXYZxyzoffice.com (Noguer, Maria)
>
>
>
>
> Dear Martin
>
> At the last meeting of the JSC/CLIVAR Working Group in Coupled
> Modelling,
> some members expressed concern that an IPCC group was setting
> constraints
> for future research by prescribing the requirements for models to
> be
> included in the DDC. In their view, IPCC should be assessing
> research, not
> guiding it. In fact, I have already circulated the model criteria
> to all
> the groups represented on the WGCM, so the problem is largely of
> presentation and external perception. I have proposed that WGCM
> should set
> the model criteria on behalf of IPCC, and I have sent round the
> condtions
> again to all members of the WGCM for their agreement. However, this
> arrangement would obviously need to be approved by the TGCIA as
> guardians of
> the DDC. Dave Griggs in his capacity as head of the WG1 TSU also
> appears
> happy with this arrangement - the only reason IPCC set up the DDC in
> the
> first place was because no one else had fulfilled that function.
>
> If you are happy with this arrangement, and the WGCM approve the
> conditions,
> then I propose that we should note the approval of (effectively)
> WCRP on the
> DDC websites.
>
> With best wishes
> John
>
>
> John F B Mitchell, Head of Modelling Climate Change
> Met.Office, Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research
> London Road, Bracknell, RG12 2SY UK
> Tel +44 (0)1344 856613/6656 Fax+44 (0)1344 856912
> E-mail john.f.mitchellatXYZxyzoffice.com
> <http://www.metoffice.com/research/hadleycentre>
>
>
>
> Prof. Martin L. Parry
> Jackson Environment Institute
> University of East Anglia
> Norwich
> NR4 7TJ
>
> Tel: +44 (0) 1603 592 318
> Fax: +44 (0) 1603 593 896
> E-mail: parrymlatXYZxyz.com
> Web: <http://www.uea.ac.uk/env/jei>
>

No comments:

Post a Comment