date: Thu, 07 Oct 1999 16:11:42 +0100
from: "Melvin Cannell" <mgrc@ite.ac.uk>
subject: Comments on draft proposal
to: <m.hulme@uea.ac.uk>

Mike, 

1. Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research is better - we are not
managing climate change. It will be become known as the Tyndall
Centre.
Are you aware of the Tyndall Forum - set up by a the Royal
institution, DETR and ERM - with 3-4 meeting a year -  has
science/policy debates across a wide constituency of opinion-formers,
decision makers and interest groups (you were not at the recent one I
contributed to on carbon sequestration).

An alternative name, the UK Climate Change Centre is too close to
UKCIP

2. The opening statement - the penetration/connectivity point -
climate change forces us to think about possible futures, in which
climate is one element - the Tyndall Center (at UEA) will embrace some
of the features of the World Resources Institute (?), looking at the
earth system.

I think you should use the phrase' earth system' early on - it has
acquired a special significance in the RCs.

Opening statement very important - must be pithy.

3. p3. -editorial points - 'through the engaging of' = by engaging'
'need to egage with' = 'need to embrace'
'The practicing of' = ' The adoption of' 
The 3 elements need to be headings of the bullets.

4. 'Institute of Hydrology' = 'Centre for Ecology and Hydrology,
Wallingford (Institute of Hydrology)'
'Institute of Terrestrial Ecology' = 'Centre for Ecology and
Hydrology, Edinburgh (Institute of Terrestrial Ecology, Edinburgh)'

5. Profesor Melvin Cannell, CEH, Edinburgh (Institute of Terrestrial
Ecology)
Mr Nick Reynard, CEH, Wallingford (Institute of Hydrology)

6. Yes, some outline of the contributions/strengths of the
institutions would be helpful. Attached is a capability statement for
CEH, Edinburgh.

7. Research Director. Yes, include the fact that an attractive
package may need to be negotiated - eg employment of spouse?  Shows we
are realistic.
Omit clauses like 'if awarded'. Assume that it will be. 

8. Management Structure. Third bullet. I think many research projects
should be put out to tender - not 'distributed between members of the
consortium'  and peer-reviewed following RC principles.

9. Yes, add as much detail on the accommodation as you can - the more
thought through the better.

10. Challenges
I would put 'Greenhouse-neutral Energy' as the first challenge - with
some bold statements about sustainable development, population,
urgency and the only real solution.
I think the nuclear energy point should be first, then the
renewables.

ITE, Edinburgh has links with Scottish Power (Mr Fred Dinning -
expert on climate and energy provision) and Scottish Nuclear. 

11. Challenges
On the Carbon Management challenge  - sequestration should be
presented as 'buying us time'. I am unhappy about bio-engineering
contributing anything much. Where to store the bio-carbon or liquid
carbon so it is secure is the main problem
Note, about 100GtC has been lost from forests and soils since
industrial times - so only about 100GtC can be put back - compared
with, say 500GtC that is likely to be emitted from fossil fuels by
2050 - so forests and soils could sequester only 20% of emissions to
2050, at a maximum - and then would be at the risk of future release
(burning, climate change itself etc). We should show that we realize
this is not the way to go in the long run - despite the excitement
post-Kyoto. 

12. Meeting the objectives....
The first bullet - I would say - developing new model frameworks to
capture the essential interactions and feedbacks between
biogeochemical and socio-economic processes. New models are needed,
which are appropriate to address particular questions. Bringing
existing models (developed for different purposes) together does not
usually work.

13. Attracting funding
I think few corporate bodies are worried about Impacts - so UKCIP
having little success - but many are worried about regulation of
energy use and some are interested in selling new technologies - I
would expect the biggest potential sponsors to be in these areas. We
should say this.

14 Training
In Thematics - about 10% of budget.

15 Costs
In thematics - admin is 5% of cost - 20% is OK if it is clear that
this will be much more than admin. 

My secretary - Lucy Douglas - is sending you my cv and the CEH and
ITE logos.

Melvin 

Professor M G R Cannell
ITE, Bush Estate, Penicuik, Midlothian EH26 0QB, Scotland
Tel: + 44 0 131 445 4343
Fax: + 44 0 131 445 3943

Attachment Converted: "c:\eudora\attach\ITEcapability.wpd"
