cc: Mike Hulme date: Sat, 29 Mar 2003 00:32:18 +0100 from: Wolfgang Cramer subject: Re: AMS-Europe - WP1.3 to: Rik Leemans Another attempt, Rik (I assume all these numbers include travel, computer and overhead, right?): WUR Ph.D. student 170000 postdoc PIK 170000 Tim Mitchell 75000 Mark Rounsevell 35000 This adds up to 450k, which I think should be possible to get. The numbers, as I see them, DO now include travel and equipment, and overhead of course. As far as PIK is concerned, I use an inverse formula that gives me person-months from this, plus the other expenses. What do you think? Wolfgang On 03/28/2003 12:54 PM,Rik Leemans wrote: >I agree with you. But if we include you, we have to exclude Tim, because >the shares become just too small. > >I further do not know, if we can actually use the grant to fund PhD-student >or that is is only for post-docs. If the latter, the Wageningen fee is >about 90000 euros a year. I want to have at least a post-doc for 2 years: >ie 180000, Wolfgang would get the same for Dagmar. >if we provide Mark Rounsevell with 25000 to provide some land-use scenario >input, that would leave 65 for you Mike. Unfortuentaly, this does not >include any travel, equipment, etc. >I would actuially like to use a dutch PHD-student (who had a 5-year msc >education) to perform the work. Then the costs come down for me to 160000 >euros for 4 years work of a person. Much more cost effective. > >So I am still in doubt how to share, please give suggestions here! > > > > > Mike Hulme > , Rik Leemans > c.uk> > cc: > 28-03-03 12:22 Subject: Re: AMS-Europe - WP1.3 > > > > > > >Rik and Wolfgang, > >I have spoken with Tim Carter also .......... he is not sure at all what >FEI will be asked to do for WP1.3 (and also very sceptical that ENSEMBLES >will really make progress in "designer climate information"). I would >therefore make a stronger argument for a resource person in WP1.3, ~€75k, >to be able to develop consistent climate information in the Scenarios WD, >and which will be useful in the other AMS Work Domains. I suggest that >person be Tim Mitchell here in Tyndall. > >As I have said to Carlo, if WP1.3 does not address this - even in this >basic minimum way - the AMS-Europe project will be a "climate-information >free zone" - this is not what we want. > >Mike > > >At 09:39 28/03/2003 +0100, Wolfgang Cramer wrote: > > >>Rik, thanks for that clarification... I still think we should actually >>support Tim Mitchell partly through this WP. I am also happy about any >>involvement of Tim - but I would like Mike's views on whether this makes >>for a productive addition here. >> >>Wolfgang >> >>On 28/03/03 09:25, Rik Leemans wrote: >> >> >> >>>Dear Mike, >>> >>>Sorry to be so little communicative, but things were changing so fast and >>> >>> >I > > >>>did not know how to effectively proceed and simultaneously involve all >>> >>> >the > > >>>necessary player. >>>I just returned to the office after a day on a very different topic the >>>World Barley, malt, and Beer conference and saw your mail. Sorry therefor >>>for my late response. >>> >>>When I was asked to coordinate WP1.3 last week, I did not have a clue on >>>what should go into it. Early this week, therefore I drafted the document >>>that you saw, which had quite some overlap with the other Wps. This were >>> >>> >my > > >>>preliminary ideas. I still strongly believe that we should do some of the >>>impacts (from emissions to impacts) in this Wp. Climate is a part of that >>>but not the only one. For me the innovative part is not only to base the >>>impact assessment on the quantitative climate scenarios but also on the >>>qualitative narratives, which help to define resilience, sensitivity etc. >>>Additionally from a systemic point of view the interactions between >>>climate, impacts and concentrations are important. This was my main >>>filosophy in drafting the WPs. >>> >>>I also had a call with Tim Carter on his involvement in other project and >>>learned several thing from him. He was very hesitant to become involved, >>>although some money for Suzanne for literature review (She did a great >>> >>> >job > > >>>on collecting scenarios information for forestry developments in EU >>>countries) was always welcome. >>> >>>I have also been thinking to involve the IMAGE group a little stronger (I >>>am not with them any more) but are hesitating because they want to focus >>> >>> >on > > >>>the mititgation strategies. >>> >>>I had indeed made the assumption that for the climate scenarios, we >>> >>> >should > > >>>use off-the shell material but I believe that it could be a good idea to >>>actually grant a little more money into to get some, for impact >>> >>> >assessment, > > >>>important climate variables from the latest runs. >>> >>>Brian is organising at 11.00 a telephone conference to discuss the Wps, >>> >>> >Why > > >>>do you not try to be involved in that discussion (I'll give brian a call >>> >>> >to > > >>>invite you as well). >>> >>>Rik >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Mike >>>Hulme >>> >>> >>, alex.haxeltine@uea.ac.uk, >>> c.uk> mike.hulme@uae.ac.uk, >>>wolfgang.cramer@pik-potsdam.de, hallegatte@centre-cired.fr, >>> hourcade@centre-cired.fr, Brian >>> >>> > > > >>>O'NEILL , naki@iiasa.ac.at, >>> 27-03-03 17:27 stapelbroek@hetnet.nl, >>>Rik.Leemans@rivm.nl, "S.E. van der Leeuw" >>> , >>>t.mitchell@uea.ac.uk >>> cc: >>>Carlo.Jaeger@pik-potsdam.de, Armin Haas >>> >>> Subject: AMS-Europe - >>>WP1.3 >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>Dear Rik - and other Scenarios WD people, >>> >>>Following 24 hours of some confusion - and having talked with >>> >>> >Jean-Charles > > >>>and Wolfgang (I have tried to raise Carlo Jaeger today for >>> >>> >clarification, > > >>>but with no luck, so I am still a little in the dark) - it seems you are >>>well on track for developing the WP1.3. >>> >>>May I therefore make sure you have seen the attached document from me >>> >>> >which > > >>>circulated a week or so ago, concerning the role of climate information >>> >>> >in > > >>>AMS-Europe. I have seen your comment that WP1.3 should *not* be about >>>climate information - historic and future - and whilst I can agree it >>>should not necessarily be *primarily* about climate information (although >>>it could be if AMS wanted it so), then it must at least pay some >>> >>> >attention > > >>>to climate information (otherwise we are *entirely* dependent upon >>> >>> >whatever > > >>>climate information other people and projects may just happen to produce >>> >>> >- > > >>>and as we know, these things rarely happen to conform to people's needs >>>just by chance!). There seems to be a need to connect the storylines in >>>WP1.1 and economics of WP1.2, including inter alia stabilisation >>> >>> >pathways, > > >>>with climate information and this connection is likely to be unique to >>>AMS-Europe (i.e., ENSEMBLES is unlikely to re-orient itself, unresourced, >>>to do this). >>> >>>So this is the main thrust of my short set of notes and I hope that you >>> >>> >can > > >>>consider these when drafting the WP1.3 - which I have not yet seen. >>> >>>Best wishes, >>> >>>Mike >>>(See attached file: Climate information in AMS.doc) >>> >>> >>> >>> >>-- >>---------------------------------------------------------------- >>Wolfgang Cramer, Department of Global Change and Natural Systems >>Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, PO Box 60 12 03 >>D-14412 Potsdam, Germany, Tel.: +49-331-288-2521, Fax: -2600 >>mail:Wolfgang.Cramer@pik-potsdam.de, www.pik-potsdam.de/~cramer >>---------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> >> > > > > > > > > > -- ---------------------------------------------------------------- Wolfgang Cramer, Department of Global Change and Natural Systems Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, PO Box 60 12 03 D-14412 Potsdam, Germany, Tel.: +49-331-288-2521, Fax: -2600 mail:Wolfgang.Cramer@pik-potsdam.de, www.pik-potsdam.de/~cramer ----------------------------------------------------------------