cc: "'Humphrey, Kathryn \(CEOSA\)'" <kathryn.humphrey@DEFRA.GSI.GOV.UK>
date: Thu Jul 10 09:18:02 2008
from: Phil Jones <p.jones@uea.ac.uk>
subject: Re: UKCIP Comments on Annex 4
to: "Roger Street" <roger.street@ukcip.org.uk>, "'C G Kilsby'" <c.g.kilsby@newcastle.ac.uk>, "'Jenkins, Geoff'" <geoff.jenkins@metoffice.gov.uk>

    Roger,
       Timely comments. I'm working on revising Ch 5 and also Annex 4. I'll send these
    off to Chris tomorrow, as I'm away next week.
       It would be very useful to get Ch 5 and Annex 4 read through again when we
    have revised the text. Suggest this isn't all of the SG plus others, but a smaller
    select group - mainly those that provided the majority of comments on the WG parts.
    Cheers
    Phil
   At 07:55 10/07/2008, Roger Street wrote:

     I understand that it is now past the identified deadline; however I offer the following
     comments in the interest of improving the presentation of Annex 4

     Annex 4
     As per comments on the overall report, when referring to the weather generator within
     UKCIP08, it should be identified as the UKCIP08 weather generator and not just the WG.

     Page 1, lines 4-5 Support the effort to provide a purpose for this annex.  Suggest that
     these statements should begin with what is the purpose of the annex, not by pointing the
     reader to another section of the report.  It would also help to describe the intent of
     the annex from a readers perspective.

     Page 2, line 7-8 Suggest simply explaining what is meant by the variance and skewness of
     daily rainfall amounts and the lag-1 autocorrelation.

     Page 2, line 9-10 It is not clear which estimation uses the daily gridded precipitation
     dataset and for what purpose.

     Page 2, line 16-17 The network of 115 stations across the UK covers which period in
     time?

     Page 3, line 12-13 Suggest explaining why half month values were used in this case.

     Page 3, line 18-19 Somewhat confusing as it was noted on page 2, lines 16-17 that
     gridded data similar to precipitation are not yet available and here it says that all
     the IVRs are either available on the 5kmX5km grid or have been interpolated to this
     grid.

     Page 3, line 23 Unable to find figure A3

     Page 3, line 34-33 What are the implications of this assumption in terms of the results
     (sensitivity)?

     Page 4, line 4-5 Suggest a little more information is needed about the limited
     capability of the WG to reproduce extremes.  This will be key and a major shortcoming
     from the perspective of users.

     Page 4, lines 10-13 Suggest that some rationale as to why these factors were chosen
     could be helpful.

     Page 5, lines 4-21 Suggest that there is a need to rethink the means (and validity) of
     presentation of these equations.  A little more explanation (such as what is each
     equation showing) may be quite helpful

     Page 5, lines 27-30 Suggest The hourly component of the UKCIP08 weather generator is
     based on the hourly timescale.  For the future weather generator simulations, it is
     assumed that none of these relationships will change, principally because.  It is not
     apparent as to why little confidence in the RCM a GCM simulations at timescales less
     than daily leads to the assumption in lines 28.  Suggest some clarification.

     Page 5, line 34 Not clear what is done for rainfall.

     Page 6, line 25 It is not clear as to the type of application for which the UKCIP08
     weather generator is being used.  Is this an impacts, vulnerability or adaptation
     assessment?

     Page 6, line 31 Believe that this is the first time that the initial seed is mentioned.
     Suggest that some further explanation is needed

     Page 6, line 34 Suggest impacts assessment rather than impact sector.

     Page 7, lines 20-22 Suggest that like raised in the comment for page 4, lines 4-5, some
     further detail related to the limited performance for events such as heatwaves is
     required.  This will also need to be covered from a use perspective within the UKCIP08
     user guidance, but the rationale and nature of the limitation need to be spelled out in
     the projections report (chapter 5 or annex 4).

     Hope that these comments and suggestions can be used to improve the annex.

     Roger

     Technical Director
     UKCIP-OUCE
     Dyson Perrings Building
     South Parks Road
     +44 (0)186 528 5713

     UKCIP's website has been relaunched, with improved navigation and a host of new
     features.  [1]www.ukcip.org.uk



   Prof. Phil Jones
   Climatic Research Unit        Telephone +44 (0) 1603 592090
   School of Environmental Sciences    Fax +44 (0) 1603 507784
   University of East Anglia
   Norwich                          Email    p.jones@uea.ac.uk
   NR4 7TJ
   UK
   ----------------------------------------------------------------------------

