date: Fri Jul 24 16:48:52 1998 from: Keith Briffa subject: the message I sent earlier- fyio to: jfbmitchell@meto.gov.uk >Return-path: >Envelope-to: k.briffa@uea.ac.uk >Delivery-date: Fri, 24 Jul 1998 15:57:18 +0100 >Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1998 15:03:26 BST >From: Julie Burgess >Subject: letter to colleagues >To: "K.R. Briffa" >Priority: Normal >Delivery-Receipt-To: Julie Burgess >Return-Receipt-To: Julie Burgess > >Keith, here is the letter you wanted to forward. >JulieB > >Thursday, 23 July 1998 > >Dear Colleagues > >This note is to let you know that at the behest of NERC >(Rodger Padgham/Neville Hollingworth/Geraint Webber) >we have been asked to have another go at putting together >a bid for a Thematic Programme of Research. This is a >follow up to the previous application to the Earth Science >and Technology Board (ESTB) that attempted, as it turns >out unsuccessfully, to get support for a palaeo/climate-modelling >collaboration. Following a discussion between Geoff Bolton, >John Lowe and Nick Shackleton at Geoscience ‘98 earlier >this year, a decision was made to go for a new proposal but to >direct it, of necessity, equally towards ESTB and the Atmospheric >Science and Technology Board (ASTB). It has been emphasised >by NERC that Climate Change is still very much on the NERC >agenda and they endorse (indeed they recommend) the joint >board approach. > >I have been asked to organise the drafting of the new proposal. >At an initial meeting of a small palaeoclimate working group, held >at NERC headquarters in London on 17th June, the reasons for the >failure of the previous bid were discussed and I consider it imperative >at this juncture to pass on the following information regarding the >previous thematic application: > > ... the proposal lacked a significant novel component. In attempting to > interface the geological climate record with the modelling activities of the > atmospheric community, it would be necessary to establish the historical > data requirements needed to validate and populate the current and > proposed new climate prediction models. The geological record is > essential to exploring timescales and changes from non-linear (but > predictable) to chaotic climatic conditions. > >These comments were apparently agreed by ESTB members. NERC has >also indicated that > > “the key drivers of climate research will probably arise from the Kyoto > summit and include carbon budgets, regional climate prediction, > biogeochemical cycles, with the palaeoclimate record per se probably > lower down the list of priorities. Linking the ancient record to the modelling > criteria will therefore be essential.” > >I reproduce these comments here to emphasise that if the reworked >proposal is to gain NERC support, it will require a clear ‘novel’ component >and a focus on the types of model being used now and that will be used >in the future to explore (anthropogenic) climate change detection and >future climate scenarios. > >At a subsequent, brief meeting attended by myself, Paul Valdes and >Nick Shackleton in Cambridge, we decided that the novel component >of a new proposal could best be represented by building it around the >Hadley Centre Aims and the Unified Model. Paul and I then met at >Bracknell with John Mitchell, Simon Tett and Peter Cox to discuss the >Hadley Centre interest and to decide whether true mutual benefit was >achievable under this scenario. I am pleased to report that the suggestion >was enthusiastically endorsed by them and we have moved on to plan an >initial proposal drafting along these lines. > >The purpose of this note is to inform you and, through you, the wider >palaeoclimate community of this effort and to assure you that your full >participation in this effort is requested. For practical reasons only, a >small drafting team was suggested at our original London meeting. >This is made up of, along with myself, Paul Valdes (Reading), John >Lowe (RHUL), Nick Shackleton (Cambridge), Alan O’Niell (Reading), >Phil Gibbard (Cambridge), and Rick Battarbee (UCL). These are >supplemented with Simon Tett and Peter Cox (Hadley Centre). When >we have something on paper, the intention is to solicit comments from >a wider ‘consultative team’ made up of David Warrilow (DETR), Geoff >Bolton (Edinburgh), David Peel (BAS), Sandy Tudhope (Edinburgh) >and Frank Oldfield (PAGES) and others. > >At this point, it would not be productive to go into greater detail about >the logic and discussions that occurred at the various meetings, other >than to say that there was a concensus that there must be a clear >focus on ‘state of the art’ modelling and the palaeowork envisaged >must be justified within the context of this (and future) climate modelling. > >Note that we are heading for a submission by the end of October! >This information should hopefully get some sort of common discussion >going. I will get back to everyone in due course. > >Best wishes > >Keith Briffa > > > > > >********************************************************************* >Message from: > >J. Burgess - Any views expressed are my own - >Climatic Research Unit - and not of the department or - >University of East Anglia - institution for which I work. - >Norwich NR4 7TJ >United Kingdom > >Tel. +44 1603 592722 >Fax. +44 1603 507784 >email. j.burgess@uea.ac.uk >Climatic Research Unit web site: http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/ > > >