Richard Black, BBC News 19 Jan 10;
The vice-chairman of the UN's climate science panel has admitted it made a mistake in asserting that Himalayan glaciers could disappear by 2035.
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) included the date in its 2007 assessment of climate impacts.
A number of scientists have recently disputed the 2035 figure, and Jean-Pascal van Ypersele told BBC News that it was an error and would be reviewed.
But he said it did not change the broad picture of man-made climate change.
The issue, which BBC News first reported on 05 December, has reverberated around climate websites in recent days.
Some commentators maintain that taken together with the contents of e-mails stolen last year from the University of East Anglia's Climatic Research Unit, it undermines the credibility of climate science.
Dr van Ypersele said this was not the case.
"I don't see how one mistake in a 3,000-page report can damage the credibility of the overall report," he said.
"Some people will attempt to use it to damage the credibility of the IPCC; but if we can uncover it, and explain it and change it, it should strengthen the IPCC's credibility, showing that we are ready to learn from our mistakes."
Grey area
The claim that Himalayan glaciers could disappear by 2035 appears to have originated in a 1999 interview with Indian glaciologist Syed Hasnain, published in New Scientist magazine.
The figure then surfaced in a 2005 report by environmental group WWF - a report that is cited in the IPCC's 2007 assessment, known as AR4.
An alternative genesis lies in the misreading of a 1996 study that gave the date as 2350.
AR 4 asserted: "Glaciers in the Himalayas are receding faster than in any other part of the world... the likelihood of them disappearing by the year 2035 and perhaps sooner is very high."
Dr van Ypersele said the episode meant that the panel's reviewing procedures would have to be tightened.
Slow reaction?
The row erupted in India late last year in the run-up to the Copenhagen climate summit, with opposing factions in the government giving radically different narratives of what was happening to Himalayan ice.
In December, it emerged that four leading glaciologists had prepared a letter for publication in the journal Science arguing that a complete melt by 2035 was physically impossible.
"You just can't accomplish it," Jeffrey Kargel from the University of Arizona told BBC News at the time.
"If you think about the thicknesses of the ice - 200-300m thicknesses, in some cases up to 400m thick - and if you're losing ice at the rate of a metre a year, or let's say double it to two metres a year, you're not going to get rid of 200m of ice in a quarter of a century."
The row continues in India, with Environment Minister Jairam Ramesh calling this week for the IPCC to explain "how it reached the 2035 figure, which created such a scare".
Meanwhile, in an interview with the news agency AFP, Georg Kaser from the University of Innsbruck in Austria - who led a different portion of the AR4 process - said he had warned that the 2035 figure was wrong in 2006, before AR4's publication.
"It is so wrong that it is not even worth discussing," he told AFP in an interview.
He said that people working on the Asia chapter "did not react".
He suggested that some of the IPCC's working practices should be revised by the time work begins on its next landmark report, due in 2013.
But its overall conclusion that global warming is "unequivocal" remains beyond reproach, he said.
IPCC chief defends panel in Himalaya glacier flap
W.g. Dunlop Yahoo News 19 Jan 10;
ABU DHABI (AFP) – The chairman of the UN's panel of climate scientists defended his Nobel-winning group on Tuesday against criticism that it had erroneously forecast an early disappearance of the Himalayan glaciers.
A section of a 2007 report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) said the probability of glaciers in the Himalayas "disappearing by the year 2035 and perhaps sooner is very high."
IPCC chairman Rajendra Pachauri, addressing reporters at the World Future Energy Summit in Abu Dhabi, said that even if the remarks on Himalayan glaciers is incorrect, it does not undermine evidence supporting the existence of climate change.
"Theoretically, let's say we slipped up on one number, I don't think it takes anything away from the overwhelming scientific evidence of what's happening with the climate of this earth," he said.
"I've never used that figure in any of my talks, because I think it's not for the IPCC to make predictions of outcomes or dates. We always give ranges, and that's scientifically the way to do it. We always give ... scenarios of what might happen."
Pachauri, whose panel was harshly criticised by India's environment minister, said the IPCC will respond to the criticism by the end of the week.
"Before the end of the week, we will certainly come to a position and make it known. We are looking into the source of that information, the veracity of it and what it is that the IPCC should say on the subject."
In New Delhi, Environment Minister Jairam Ramesh was quoted on Tuesday by the Hindustan Times as saying "the IPCC claim that glaciers will vanish by 2035 was not based on an iota of scientific evidence.
"The IPCC has to do a lot of answering on how it reached the 2035 figure, which created such a scare."
Ramesh said he felt "vindicated" after repeatedly challenging the IPCC's work on glaciers. He believes there is no "conclusive scientific evidence" linking global warming to the melting of glaciers.
At the weekend, Britain's Sunday Times newspaper reported that the reference to 2035 came from the green campaign group WWF, which in turn took it from an interview given by an Indian glaciologist to New Scientist magazine in 1999.
There is no evidence that the claim was published in a peer-reviewed journal, a cornerstone of scientific credibility, it said.
Responding to a question, Pachauri said he feels he is being attacked personally over the potential flaw.
But he put a positive spin on the situation, saying: "You know, you can't attack the science, so attack the chair of the IPCC."
The IPCC is already under attack over hacked email exchanges which skeptics say reflected attempts to skew the evidence for global warming.
The new row has boosted climate skeptics, who have questioned scientific evidence behind global warming in the past and are on a roll after a scandal last month dubbed "climategate."
Indian minister slams UN body on glacier research
Yahoo News 19 Jan 10;
NEW DELHI (AFP) – India's environment minister slammed the UN's top climate body in comments published Tuesday, claiming its doomsday warning about Himalayan glaciers was not based on "scientific evidence."
The controversy focuses on a reference in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's (IPCC) landmark 2007 report that said the chances of Himalayan glaciers "disappearing by the year 2035 and perhaps sooner is very high."
"The IPCC claim that glaciers will vanish by 2035 was not based on an iota of scientific evidence," minister Jairam Ramesh told the Hindustan Times.
"The IPCC has to do a lot of answering on how it reached the 2035 figure, which created such a scare."
On Monday, the IPCC's chairman, Rajendra Pachauri, told AFP that the panel would review the 2035 figure.
Ramesh said he felt "vindicated" after repeatedly challenging the IPCC's work on glaciers. He believes there is no "conclusive scientific evidence" linking global warming to the melting of glaciers.
In November, Ramesh backed a study by Indian scientists which supported his view, prompting Pachauri to label his support "arrogant."
The Nobel-winning IPCC is already under attack over hacked email exchanges which skeptics say reflected attempts to skew the evidence for global warming.
The new row has boosted climate skeptics, who have questioned scientific evidence behind global warming in the past and are on a roll after a scandal last month dubbed "climategate."
Emails from scientists at Britain's University of East Anglia, a top centre for climate research, were leaked and seized on by sceptics as evidence that experts twisted data in order to dramatise global warming.
Ramesh conceded to the Hindustan Times that "most glaciers are in a poor state," but said they were receding at different rates and a few were even advancing.
