Review Comments by Experts on First Order Draft of Volume 1 of 2019 Refinement to the 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories
Comment ID Volume Chapter
9708
1
1

From line To line
1719

Comment
ExpertMore or less general: Should we somehow adress that there are
Michael Strogies
meanwhile also citties, regions or subnational territorial units
working on calculation of GHG emission information. They could
be a source of information or user…or…

Response
Accepted withmodification

Authors' note
Text has been included on how these considerations are relevant in
the context of the IPCC Guidelines.

7016

1

1

32

38

I assume that this para will be adjusted for the 2019 Refinments or Vitor Gois Ferreiraan additional paragraph will be added

Accepted withmodification

Introduction to the 2019 Refinement was relocated to the Overview
chapter.

7658

1

1

32

33

For better understanding by users, it would appropriate to give anumber of section and change the current text to the following
name: “1.1 Scope and Objectives”. In this case, Chapter 1 will
have clear objectives of the 2019 refinementt.

Nataliya Stranadko

Accepted

Subheadings revised.

7660

1

1

38

39

After the line 38, it would appropriate to highlight the main
objective of the 2019 refinementt as decision IPCC/XLIV-5
determined it. Thus, the following paragraph might be included:“The main objective of the 2019 refinementt is to provide an
updated and sound scientific basis of the 2006 IPCC Guidelines
for supporting the preparation and continuous improvement of
national greenhouse gas inventories”.

Nataliya Stranadko

Accepted withmodification

Discussion of IPCC mandate and background on refinement has
been provided in the Overview chapter.

97

1

1

39

a comma should be introduced after "reporting"

Chukwuma Anoruo

Accepted

Text revised.

390

1

1

39

41

Accepted

Text revised.

4288

1

1

39

39

Accepted

Text revised.

7662

1

1

39

39

Accepted

Text revised.

6734

1

1

39

39

Accepted withmodification

Text revised.

7018

1

1

39

42

copy edit: verbs shoud be singular: "provides only guidance" and Pauline Midgley"does not provide guidance"
I suggest that the authors delete "only" because the refinementt
Naofumi Kosaka
will provide methodology to estimate GHG emissions.
To change the word “recognize” to “emphasize”. It would look like Nataliya Stranadko“It is important to emphasize…”
Suggest to change the following: "provide only guidance for
Raul Salas Reyes
reporting which refers to the" to "only provides guidance forreporting that refers to the".
I understand that explanations on the scope may be necessary (and Vitor Gois Ferreira
maybe some reference to the Wetlands Supplement and the KP
Supplement could be made), but I think this paragraph needs
rephrasing, because the GL are not only for reporting, rather the
preparation of inventories. Regarding accounting, it could be betterto indicate that it does not contain information on how to report for
any accounting system such as the Kyoto Protocol, although theinventory itself can be used as a basis for such accounting.

Noted

Text on accounting was removed.

Comment ID Volume Chapter
9704
1
1

From line To line
39
42

Comment
ExpertQuotation: …. that the 2019 refinementt provide only guidance for Michael Strogies
reporting which refers to the presentation of emission…
Is that true?? My hope is that the 2019 refinementt provides mostly
methodological support for calculation of GHG emissions.
This should be included here!

Response
Accepted withmodification

Authors' note
Purpose of refinement has been addressed in Overview chapter.

6738

1

1

41

41

Suggest to change "but do not provide" to "but does not provide"

Raul Salas Reyes

Accepted

Text revised.

6736

1

1

41

41

Suggest to clarify what does accounting mean. Readers that arefamiliar with the Paris Agreement might confuse the term
accounting with the definition used in Article 4.13, which isdifferent from the meaning used in the IPCC guidelines.

Raul Salas Reyes

Noted

No action can be taken because comment is out of scope of 2019
Refinement.

7664

1

1

42

42

It would be appropriate to write “compliance with country
Nataliya Stranadko
commitments under the UNFCCC”. For first time reader, it is notclear - commitments of whom and compliance under what?

Noted

No action can be taken because comment is out of scope of 2019
Refinement.

770

1

1

43

It will be useful if you could also present a summary table listingout the changes or refinementts made in the proposed 2019
National Greenhouse Inventory Guidelines as compared to the2006 and 1996 National Greenhouse Inventory Guidelines

Karachepone Ninan

Accepted withmodification

The summary of refinements are provided in the mapping tables in
the Annex to each Volume. Changes refer to the comparison withthe 2006 IPCC Guidelines.

7666

1

1

44

44

Renumber sections of Chapter 1 taking into account changes inlines 32-33. Thus, it will be “Sections 1.2 to 1.4 describe the…”

Nataliya Stranadko

Accepted withmodification

Subheadings revised.

7668

1

1

45

45

Modify the word combination from “focusing on scope, approach, Nataliya Stranadko
and structure” to “focusing on concepts, methodological approach,and structure”. Renumber sections of Chapter 1 taking into
account changes in lines 32-33. Thus, it will be “Sections 1.5
through 1.6…”.

Accepted

Text revised.

7670

1

1

46

46

Add a word “new” to this line because Sections 1.5 through 1.6
provide updated and new guidance. Thus, this line would be look
like “present step-by-step new guidance on how to use the 2019refinementt for compiling a greenhouse gas inventory”.

Nataliya Stranadko

Accepted

Added.

7672

1

1

48

48

Renumber sections of Chapter 1 taking into account changes inlines 32-33. This section provides not just the name of concepts
but gives the concept’s definition. Therefore, the name of thissection would be “1.2 Concepts and Definitions”.

Nataliya Stranadko

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

Comment ID Volume Chapter
7674
1
1

From line To line
49
49

Comment
Delete this line “Update of Section 1.1 of the 2006 IPCC
Guidelines”. Updating the 2006 IPCC Guidelines is one of theobjectives of the 2019 refinementt that is stated after the line 38.
There is no need to repeat it in each section.

6742

1

1

50

50

6740

1

1

50

6744

1

1

5840

1

6746

7020

ExpertNataliya Stranadko

Response
Accepted

Authors' note
The comment has been addressed in SOD.

It is not entirely clear what are the "few key concepts" refered to. I Raul Salas Reyes
suggest to further clarify, as the following paragraph does not seemto connect.

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

50

It is not clear what "This helps to ensure" refers to. I suggest to
clarify what is "This" refering toRaul Salas Reyes

Accepted

Text changed as proposed.

50

50

I suggest to change "Inventories" with "National inventories" or"National greenhouse gas inventories"

Raul Salas Reyes

Accepted

Editorial: Agree.

1

53

57

Explaining this new concept of how to reduce the impacts ofVincent Camobreco
natural disturbances on reporting trends is an important concept todiscuss in this section, but having it as the second paragraph under“1.1 Concepts” without even a subtitle to introduce it seems a bit
abrupt/confusing. It would be preferable if it were inserted under
the subheading on “Anthropogenic emissions and removals” (page1.3, lines 58-64), since it is a part of that concept of how to
identify anthropogenic emissions and removals. Additionally, theauthors may need to update/remove this text depending on whether
the new guidance on removing impacts of natural disturbances on
the trends actually makes it into the2019 refinementt AFOLU
volume following the review/editing cycles under way and still tocome.

Accepted

Text has been revised and considered in the overall
introduction/overview for the 2019 Refinement.

1

1

53

55

Looking at Volume 2 Chapter 4, the only reference to LULUCF
Raul Salas Reyes
emissions is found on the line 2341 of Vol 2 Chapter 4 that says
"Emissions of CO2 from charcoal production are considered underLand Use, Land-Use Change and Forestry (LULUCF)". I would
like to make two suggestions in this case. The first one, to allign
whether the term AFOLU should be standardized throughout therefinementt or if it will be using both AFOLU and LULUCF. If thecase is the latter, then I would suggest to clarify why is the reason
for this so that relevant parties can understand the difference. My
second suggestion is to review whether the volume and chapter
refered to in these lines is correct, and if so, clarify why is this.

Accepted

AFOLU/LULUCF terminology has been revised and madeconsistent among the chapters.

1

1

53

57

This is not a concept. Consider moving

Accepted

Introduction to the 2019 Refinement was relocated to the Overview
chapter.

Vitor Gois Ferreira

Comment ID Volume Chapter
394
11

From line To line
53
57

Comment
Expertthis is a very long and hard to understand sentence. I suggest
Pauline Midgley
splitting for clarity at line 55 after "volume 4, chapter 2".
Beginning the second sentence "XX is intended to reduce theimpacts .." Not clear to me what XX should be; I guess "This goodpractice guidance "Response
Accepted withmodification

Authors' note
Text has been revised and considered in the overall
introduction/overview for the 2019 Refinement.

7800

1

1

54

54

Accepted withmodification

AFOLU/LULUCF terminology has been revised and madeconsistent among the chapters.

392

1

1

55

55

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

6100

1

1

62

64

This line refers to a LULIUCF reference in the 2006 GLs. But
Maya Huntdoes LULUCF appear in those guidelines? Would a FOLU
reference be more correct?
copy edit: reverse chapter and volume, i.e. to read "volume 4,
Pauline Midgley
chapter 2"
Some managed lands, such as cropland and grassland on upland
Stephen Del Grosso
soils, are CH4 sinks (e.g., Vol1_Chp1_L62-64_SD). However, thissink category is not currently accounted for. This contradicts text
stating that 'emissions and removals on managed lands are taken asa proxy for anthropogenic emissions and removals'.

Noted

No action can be taken because comment is out of scope of 2019
Refinement.

267

1

1

68

68

8.2.1 of Volume 1 doen's exist

Bruno Kestemont

NotedThis is part of unchanged text from 2006 IPCC Guidelines.

2396

1

1

71

77

While it is important to track trends over time, going all the way
back to 1990 causes significant uncertainty to the emissions
estimates (and may provide a false sense of emissions
improvement). I highly recommend employing 2005 as the baseyear. The activity data should be better and therefore thebackcasting may be better. Further for methane, the science andunderstanding of key sources has dramatically improved over the
past decade.

Fiji George

Noted

No action can be taken because comment is out of scope of 2019
Refinement.

6084

1

1

82

82

delete "according to, for example, a country’s obligations as a
William Hohenstein
Party to the UNFCCC" Country reporting obligations under the
UNFCCC are determined by Parties to the Convention and tables
for that reporting are specified in decisions made by Parties to theConvention.

Noted

No action can be taken because comment is out of scope of 2019
Refinement.

4346

1

1

84

95

How about O3? Other chapter mentioned it. It is also useful todiscuss the difference in greenhouse effect between ground andsatellite measurment.

Kewei Yu

Noted

No action can be taken because comment is out of scope of 2019
Refinement.

6748

1

1

84

105

Would it make sense to include carbonaceous aerosols (eg., black
carbon)?

Raul Salas Reyes

Noted

No action can be taken because comment is out of scope of 2019
Refinement.

5760

1

1

85

95

Even though this is in gray it serves as an example of how to
Ann Gallagher
improve the first interaction with the " inventory compilers andother stakeholders". Leave the list of gases but change the order so
F-gases are clearly understood. "The following greenhouse gases"
down to "nitrous oxide" can remain then the next bullet would be"F-gases" with an indentation for the sublisted fluorinated gasesthat are in teh 2006 Guidelines.

Accepted

the word 'F-gases' has been placed before the list of actual F-gases
which has been put in a sublist.

398

1

1

96

97

shouldn't the most up to date GWPs be referenced not pre-2006?

Accepted withmodification

The guidelines are not prescriptive on which GWPs to use. Text
will be added to highlight this.

Pauline Midgley

Comment ID Volume Chapter
2398
1
1

From line To line
96
99

400

1

1

100

100

6702

1

1

107

207

396

1

1

110

111

5842

1

1

119

121

6086

1

1

119

120

9168

1

1

122

124

7676

1

1

128

10152

1

1

4032

1

1

Comment
ExpertConsider GWPs of 20 years especially to better understand theFiji George
impacts of SLCPs
unclear what "These gases" refers to; which gases? not all in thePauline Midgley
above list. Probably this sentence should follow on directly fromthe one before, not as a new paragraph.
In addition to the lists of sources and links of greenhouse gas
Onema Adojoh
emission in line 106 (Sector and Categories), decomposed remainsof animal and wild fire (Bush burning) can also cause Carbon
emission into the atmosphere.
comment is to Footnote 4: could legitimately say "much smaller
Pauline Midgley
amounts" here

Response
Noted
Accepted

Authors' noteNo action can be taken because comment is out of scope of 2019
Refinement.
Flow of sentences reviewed accordingly.

Accepted withmodification

Text added to clarify whether these emissions are counted or not.

Rejected

The halogenated gases are typically emitted in smaller amounts
than CO2, CH4 and N2O, but may have long atmospheric lifetimes
and strong radiative forcing effects.

Given that there are significant updates to the HWP guidance
Vincent Camobreco
being proposed in AFOLU, some update to this text may benecessary.
more precise to say "account for carbon stored in HWP" rather
William Hohensteinthan include HWP.
Here authors note an exception to the usual practice of 'reporting Peter Riggs
organized according to the sector actually generating the emissions-- the exception is for wood used as energy. The fact that noemissions are recorded at the site of biomass combustion, and only
as changes in forest stock, has created policy conditions whereby
countries importing biomass choose to completely ignore theemissions associated with burning. While not strictly speaking an
IPCC problem, nonetheless as the percentage of Harvested Wood
Prodcuts taking the form of biomass feedstocks and wood pellets,
it is critical that such emissions have greater 'visibility' within
reporting, going beyond just an 'information item'. Otherwise, this"tends to reinforce the assumption that biomass energy is carbonneutral at the point of use." Simply stated it is time to 'end theexception' that biomass burning not be counted at the site of
combustion. Of the goal of these guidelines is CONSISTENCY,
then it's time to ensure consistency by requiring that biomassenergy emissions be counted for in the energy sector!

Accepted

Comment addressed in Volume 4.

Rejected

Text is from the 2006 IPCC Guidelines. 'not included' is used forinternational transport.
Text has been added to clarify the issue, and ensure consistency
among the sectors. The biomass issue is considered in the
Overview chapter"Reporting is generally organised according to the sector actually
generating emissions or removals. There are some exceptions tothis practice, such as CO2 emissions from biomass combustion forenergy, which should be estimated and are reported in AFOLU
Sector as part of net changes in carbon stocks. CO2 from bioenergy
should be estimated in Energy but reported as a memo item toEnergy to avoid double counting with reporting under AFOLU.
This does not imply that bioenergy is “carbon neutral”. Where CO2
emissions are captured from industrial processes or large
combustion sources, emissions should be allocated to the sector
generating the CO2 unless it can be shown that the CO2 is stored inproperly monitored geological storage sites as set out in Chapter 5of Volume 2".

128

Renumber sections of Chapter 1 taking into account changes inlines 32-33. This section would be “1.3 Estimation Methods”.

Nataliya Stranadko

Accepted

Text has been revised and sections renumbered.

133

133

Calculation should be explained properly, as this document does
not include any supporting documentation

Malini Nair

Noted

No action can be taken because comment is out of scope of 2019
Refinement.

143

150

Recent research has shown that some "biofuels" are in fact a blend Gregory Petersof biogenic and fossil carbon (see Vol5_Chp6_L773-811). A"heads-up" in the form of a footnote would be worthwhile here.

Noted

No action can be taken because comment is out of scope of 2019
Refinement.

Accepted withmodification

Comment ID Volume Chapter
7678
1
1

From line To line
151
151

Comment
ExpertTerm “concepts” is used in this section as well as in the previous Nataliya Stranadko
section. When it relates to the methods, it may be better to usesome other term like “pillars” or “approaches”. It is a little bit
confusing because main concepts were explained in the previous
section. Term “approaches” instead of “concepts” in this section
would be applied reasonably because in lines 207-208 a phrase “agood practice approach” is already used.

Response
Accepted

Authors' note
Text revised.

404

1

1

153

153

spelling should be "principles"

Accepted

Revised.

40

1

1

158

160

Here and throughout, the tier 1, 2 and 3 approaches are clearlyDavid Reay
explained. As national data and modelling capacity improves there
should be an increasing move towards tier 2 and some tier 3 formore and more activities. As such, I wonder whether a box clearly
explaining how this process occurs and what is required (e.g. an
example for, say, UK N2O EFs in agriculture) so that users canbetter mao a course towards tier 2 and 3 progression.

Accepted

Text added to address the issue. Guidance on this is also provided
in each sectoral chapter.

7680

1

1

173

173

Renumber sections of Chapter 1 taking into account changes inlines 32-33. This section would be “1.4 Structure of the
Guidelines”.

Nataliya Stranadko

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

7682

1

1

184

184

Renumber sections of Chapter 1 taking into account changes inlines 32-33. This line would start “detail in Section 1.6”.

Nataliya Stranadko

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

4348

1

1

185

QA/QC are not defined before use.

Kewei Yu

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

7684

1

1

204

204

Renumber sections of Chapter 1 taking into account changes inlines 32-33. This section would be “1.5 Inventory Quality”.

Nataliya Stranadko

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

6730

1

1

205

205

2)Amend typo in line 205, replace the first “on” with “for”.

Onema Adojoh

Rejected

Text is from the 2006 IPCC Guidelines. No need to change.

9868

1

1

250

522

Section 1.5 includes some useful material but the benefits of theDavid Glen
section (which should be clear guidance to assist in delivery ofThistlethwaite
high quality inventories) are diluted by excessive detail (e,g, lists
that could be annexes) and the use of confusing terminology that is
not explained. It needs to be more concise. Examples follow.

Accepted

Clarity and context of text has improved.

Pauline Midgley

Comment ID Volume Chapter
10072
1
1

From line To line
250
264

Comment
Expert
For this entire new section on national inventory management
Neelam Singhsystems, it would be helpful for the users of this guidance to see aclear list of essential core elements of such a system upfront eventhough this is not prescriptive. What does the guidancesuggest/recommend are some key essential components of such
systems - need to list that here before readers get to 1.5.1.

Response
Accepted

Authors' note
Bulleted list of core elements added to this section.

9006

1

1

250

251

1.5 NATIONAL "GHG " INVENTORY MANAGEMENTSYSTEMS - Word "GHG" may be added for more clarity about
title.

Accepted withmodification

Refer to Author's note associated with comment ID 7686: National
Inventory Arrangements.

9980

1

1

250

522

Recommend compressing content and integrating some general
Mausami Desaicontext on NIMS in section 1.6 on steps to compiling an inventory(establishing/updating arrangements, institutional roles to support
compilation steps, including establishing a compilation team andthat practice and, with review and improvements often guided bybroader input from contributing agencies and experts, section
1.5.3). The introductory guidance should focus on facilitating useof these inventory guidelines, in particular considering improving
user friendliess of section on how a compiler should walk throughthis guidance and apply these Guidelines focusing on enhancing
section 1.6, etc. This is valuable as the documents are
overwhelming to new experts/compilers and the titles, headers are
not often indicative of the content in the section, so someone
skimming the GL may skip over a relevant section which may
contain the content they are seeking. The inclusion of a dedicatedsection on National Inventory Management Systems seems out of
scope as the IPCC Guidelines provide methodological guidance on
estimating emissions, not institutional best practices. Further, there
is a considerable and significant library of tools and materials fromother relevant institutions some referenced, but that could morecomprehensively be referenced as part of a more general
discussion in inventory compilation steps from UNFCCC,UNFCCC CGE, UNDP (has a full manual on this called"Managing the GHGI process", potentially recently updated) andnow the Global Support Program (UNDP-UNEP) also recently
released guidance that also discusses this in the context of peer
review (released in 2017), in addition to other numerous
institutions producing case-studies, examples (e.g. GIZ, WRI, andalso US EPA's template workbook/toolkit). These tools could besummarized in a box.

Accepted withmodification

The mandate from IPCC plenary included request for expanded
guidance on national inventory management systems. Specifically:"Provide a better description on how to implement a national
inventory management system that manages all parts of Volume 1,
implements continuous improvement and leads to the developmentof mature inventories". SOD does not provide references to existing
literature on national inventory systems and tools because there is alarge array of different tools and guidance designed for different
purposes and different reporting requirements. None of these tools
provide adequately generic approaches. Tools and guidance are also
continually evolving and listing and therefore endorsing any would
be confusing.

Vishwa Bandhu Pant

Comment ID Volume Chapter
9980 (cont.)

From line To line

Comment
ExpertAny examples, if retained should be moved to an Annex so it isvery clear they are examples. The proposed overview indicates that
this is not intended to be prescriptive, but the content in new
sections do carry greater implications if included and further thesesteps that may not be applicable to all countries, including some of
the tables and figures.
While section on mandates seems useful asplanning/documentation tool and the example table is notnecessary to illustrate the point. Also, recommend finding a way tofold in consideration of mandates into a general step on
establishing/updating arrangements/roles, etc. Broadly wanted toflag a greater concern, if establishing NIMS is a "good practice" it
has implications beyond just serving as guidance but ultimately
reporting under the UNFCCC and future agreements under theconvention that reference reporting using "good practice" methods
under the IPCC. In those frameworks, countries will be assessedagainst their application of the good practice guidance. Inclusionof this content as currently organized and detailed, could present abarrier to its adoption for future use, as his becomes good practiceguidance (including mandates, steering committees, etc.). These
GL could be perceived to increase burden, etc. Again, while there
is value in noting the importance and consideration of institutionalarrangements in a general context, clear roles and responsiblities
for compilation, specifiying cross-cutting and sectoral roles, etc.
recommend reconsidering approach to integrating this informationin this and other sections (i.e. inventory compilation steps, datacollection) and referencing other sections where more details areincluded (e.g. QA/QC already has some good detail on roles,
responsiblities).

Response

Authors' note

10002

250

Vol. 1, Chapter 1 - An element where emphasis might be helpful is Mausami Desaidocumenation, archiving in compilation steps. Information in
Chapter 8 could be added here and further could emphasize
following sections at the end of category-level guidance onreporting and documentation.

Accepted withmodification

Text added to subsection 1.5.4.3 addressing documentation andarchiving with reference to category-specific guidance on
documentation and reporting.

1

1

522

Comment ID Volume Chapter
7686
1
1

From line To line
250
251

Comment
ExpertIn the name of the section, it would be appropriate to delete a word Nataliya Stranadko“management”, and renumber sections of Chapter 1 taking into
account changes in lines 32-33. Thus, this section would be “1.6
National Inventory Systems”. The Guideline about national
inventory systems should be consistent with the UNFCCC
Decision 24/CP.19 “Revision of the UNFCCC reporting guidelines
on annual inventories for Parties included in Annex I to theConvention”. According to the Decision 24/CP.19, the national
inventory system arrangements include the processes of planning,
preparation, and management of inventory activities. In this case, aterm “management” relates to archiving all relevant inventory
information for the reported time series, including documentation
about emission factors and how data have been generated andaggregated for the preparation of the inventory, internal
documentation on QA/QC procedures, key categories, and planned
inventory improvements. Therefore, management is a part of thenational inventory system, and the system itself includes theinstitutional, legal and procedural arrangements which are actually
addressed in the next sections.

Response
Accepted withmodification

Authors' note
Suggestion has been modified from "National Inventory System" to"National Inventory Arrangements" as outlined in the Decision
24/CP.19.

6750

1

1

252

252

Remove "New guidance in section 1.5 of the 2019 refinementt"Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

7688

1

1

252

252

Delete a sentence “New guidance in section 1.5 of the 2019
Nataliya Stranadko
refinementt.” Proposed section 1.1 “Scope and Objectives” alreadystates that this section provides step-by-step new guidance.

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

7690

1

1

252

254

The sentence is confusing, and it is not clearly expressed of using Nataliya Stranadko
the double words with the same meaning. Therefore, rewrite
current sentence “It provides guidance on the development,
improvement and maintenance of national GHG inventory
management systems and highlights the importance of suchinstitutional systems in the inventory compilation process” to thenext sentence “This section provides guidance on the development,
improvement and maintenance of national GHG inventory systems
and highlights the importance of institutional arrangements in theinventory compilation process”.

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

6752

1

1

252

252

Suggest to start paragraph with: "The 2019 refinementt provides
guidance on the development, improvement and…"

Accepted withmodification

Sentence amended as proposed.

Raul Salas Reyes

Raul Salas Reyes

Comment ID Volume Chapter
7022
1
1

From line To line
252
254

Comment
It could be good to insert in this paragraph, a broad definition ofwhat the arrangements could be, for example: A national system
includes all institutional, legal and procedural arrangements madewithin a Party included in Annex I for estimating anthropogenic
emissions by sources and removals by sinks of all greenhousegases not controlled by the Montreal Protocol, and for reporting
and archiving inventory
information.

ExpertVitor Gois Ferreira

Response
Accepted withmodification

Authors' note
Text has been revised to include these concepts.

6754

1

1

253

253

Remove "of such" to just keep "maintenance of national GHG
inventory management systems and highlights the importance ofinstitutional"

Raul Salas Reyes

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

10074

1

1

253

254

Revise as shown - ….highlights the importance of 'establishing an Neelam Singhinstitutionalized approach to' the inventory compilation process.

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

10076

1

1

253

253

Though this line talks about highlighting the importance of
Neelam Singhinsitutional systems, or national GHG inventory management
systems, this information is missing in the section. Suggest adding
a few bullets explaining the benefits of having such a system inplace - in row 259 as further elaborated in the next comment.

Accepted withmodification

Brief discussion of benefits of national inventory systems wasrevised in section 1.5.

6756

1

1

255

255

Change "which" to "that": "This guidance is not intended to be
Raul Salas Reyes
prescriptive. It instead provides examples that illustrate the typical"

Accepted

Done.

7692

1

1

255

256

Rewrite current sentence “It instead provides examples which
illustrate the typical components of a management system andpractical guidance on tools and approaches” to the next sentence“It instead provides examples which illustrate the typicalcomponents of national inventory system and practical guidance
for using appropriate inventory tools and approaches”.

Nataliya Stranadko

Rejected

Proposed language does not add technical clarity.

6758

1

1

256

256

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

7694

1

1

257

258

Include GHG inventory in "components of a GHG inventory
Raul Salas Reyes
management system and practical fuidance on tools andapproaches"
Rewrite current sentence “It is good practice for the national GHG Nataliya Stranadko
inventory compilation process to be managed through arecognised, supported, and sustainable institutional system” to thenext sentence “It is good practice for the inventory compilation
process to be administrated through a recognised, supported, andsustainable national entity with overall responsibility for thenational inventory”.

Accepted withmodification

Introduction to concept of national entity occurs later in chapter.
However, the paragraph has been revised for clarity.

6762

1

1

258

258

Accepted

Editorial: Revised paragraph to clarify.

6760

1

1

258

258

Accepted withmodification

Removed terms "recognised" and "supported".

Remove "Such" to start as: A GHG inventory management system Raul Salas Reyes
includes the…"
the concepts "recognised, supported, and sustainable" are not
Raul Salas Reyes
defined and come out as unclear/confusing.

Comment ID Volume Chapter
7696
1
1

From line To line
258
259

Comment
Delete the sentence “Such a GHG inventory management system
includes the processes and expertise involved in the compilation
inventory data and reports”.

10078

1

1

258

259

6764

1

1

258

9870

1

1

10080

1

10082

ExpertNataliya Stranadko

Response
Accepted withmodification

Authors' note
The paragraph has been revised.

Modify as suggested: Such a GHG inventory management system Neelam Singh'documents' the 'institutional arrangements,' processes, 'methods,
data sources, roles and responsibilities,' and expertise involved in
the compilation 'of' inventory data and reports. 'It creates a record
which can support inventory teams in the development of
inventories in subsequent years.'

Accepted withmodification

Brief discussion of benefits of national inventory systems wasrevised in section 1.5.

259

The Paragraph from "Such a" to "Inventory data and reports" isRaul Salas Reyes
confusing. I would suggest to revise to: "A GHG inventory system
assists with the compilation of GHG inventory data and reports
through established processes and expertise"

Accepted withmodification

Text has been revised to clarify.

258

260

Confused text that goes beyond the scope of inventory guidance. David Glen
Thistlethwaite
Suggest: "A national inventory system should establish clear
inventory governance, and roles and responsibilities to enable theSingle National Entity to efficiently manage the processes andexpertise that are required to deliver a national inventory
submission. Such a system may also be extended beyond the scopeof national inventory reporting to encompass other national data
and reporting requirements such as to facilitate setting and trackingof national mitigation targets, and even to enable policy appraisalof individual mitigation measures."Accepted withmodification

Captured by revised text.

1

259

259

Missing word 'of' as shown here - …involved in the compilation'of' inventory data and reports

Neelam Singh

Accepted

Fixed.

1

1

259

260

Suggest deleting this sentence - 'It is a tool with which a country
Neelam Singh
can track trends in emissions/removals and understand theperformance of mitigation measures.' This sentence applies moreto the inventory itself rather than to an inventory management
system. The management system enables development and updates
to inventory to then enable tracking of trends etc.

Accepted

Removed.

7062

1

1

259

259

I believe this sentence is missing an 'of' between 'compilation' and Amanda Penistone'inventory'

Accepted

Text has been revised.

1366

1

1

259

259

"of" missing in middle of the line: processes and expertis involved Regine Röthlisberger
in the compilation "of" inventory data and reports.

Accepted withmodification

Text has been revised.

Comment ID Volume Chapter
458
11

From line To line
259
260

Comment
Expert
It will be helpful if some explanation is included, to justify the fact Virginia Sena
pointed out in the sentence: "It is a tool with which a country can
track trends in emissions/removals and understand theperformance of mitigation measures."Response
Noted

Authors' noteNo action can be taken because comment is out of scope of 2019
Refinement.

9706

1

1

259

259

Could we name it "basic requirement" instead of "tool" ?

Michael Strogies

Noted

Raul Salas Reyes

Accepted

No action can be taken because comment is out of scope of 2019
Refinement.
Editorial: Revised paragraph to clarify.

6766

1

1

260

260

7024

1

1

261

264

include "and" in between "emissions/removals": "emissions andremovals"This is somehow vague. Would recommend to clarify or remove.

7698

1

1

261

264

It would be appropriate to change the current text in these lines to Nataliya Stranadko
the following text reflected in the UNFCCC Decision 24/CP.19:“National inventory systems are designed and operated in order to:•Ensure the transparency, consistency, comparability,
completeness, and accuracy of inventories, as defined in section
1.5 above;•Ensure the quality of inventories through the development,
improvement, and maintenance of inventory activities. Inventory
activities include collecting data, selecting methods and emission
factors appropriately, estimating anthropogenic GHG emissions bysources and removals by sinks, implementing uncertainty
assessment and QA/QC activities, and carrying out procedures forthe verification of the inventory data at the national level”.

Vitor Gois Ferreira

Accepted

Text revised.

Accepted withmodification

Text revised to capture the concepts.

6768

1

1

262

262

6770

1

1

262

264

9008

1

1

262

262

9872

1

1

263

263

1376

1

1

265

369

What does "efficient inventory updates" mean? I suggest to justRaul Salas Reyes
keep "Inventory updates"
Would it make sense to include: Understand emission trends inRaul Salas Reyes
Nationally Determined Contributions, policy making, and meetinternational obligations?
" Ongoing " and / or Efficient inventory - Word "Ongoing" may Vishwa Bandhu Pant
be added for more clarity.
Suggest the addition of "timeliness": "Increased quality, timeliness David Glen
and availability of data and reporting.."
Thistlethwaite
In my view, the section 1.5.1.5 Organzational structure and 1.5.1.6 Regine Röthlisberger
Stakeholder roles and responsibilities should be placed right after
1.5.1.1 Scope and mandate, before 1.5.1.2 Single national entity,
1.5.1.3. Inventory agency and 1.5.1.4 Technical steeringcommittee, as SNE, InvAgenc., Steering Comm. are all parts of
the organizational structure and are listed as individual
stakeholders in Table 1.3. I find it more consistent to provide abrief overview over Organizational structure and stakeholders first
and then provide additional information on particular stakeholders.

Accepted

Text revised and clarified in response to other comments.

Rejected

IPCC Guidelines cannot reference specific political agreements, butissues are captured in text on mitigation measures.

Accepted

Text has been revised to clarify use of "efficient".

Accepted

Text revised.

Accepted

Text revised.

Comment ID Volume Chapter
7700
1
1

From line To line
265
265

Comment
ExpertRenumber sections of Chapter 1 taking into account changes in
Nataliya Stranadkolines 32-33. This section would be “1.6.1 Institutional
Arrangements”.
There is considerable diversity in how countries implement
Mausami Desainational inventory systems and use of mandates, etc. Depending on
national circumstances, arrangements will vary from formal to very
informal. In the US, collection of data is mandated and readily
available without formal arrangements. These are very clear
examples of mechanisms to facilitate compilation, review etc.
They support production of a high quality inventory, but the typeand extent of necessary arrangements should really be up to thecountry. Strongly recommend making compressing this content toan example box to complement a very general step of establishingor changing/updating any arrangements to support regularcompilation. Table 1.2 is not necessary to explain use of thisguidance.

Response
Accepted

Authors' note
Sections have been renumbered.

9982

1

1

266

329

Accepted withmodification

Text added to address diversity of institutional arrangment
approaches.

6772

1

1

267

267

Not clear what the "in keeping with" refers to. I would suggest torephrase as: "It provides guidance on identifying appropriatecomponents in line with the inventory's intended uses"

Raul Salas Reyes

Accepted

Text revised.

7702

1

1

1368

1

1

268

268

Delete word “typical”.

Nataliya Stranadko

Accepted

Text revised.

270

270

eliminate (s): Institutional arrangements include(s) the interactions Regine Röthlisberger

Accepted

Text revised.

6774

1

1

270

270

Accepted

Text revised.

1

271

271

remove plural in "includes" to have "Institutional arrangements
Raul Salas Reyes
include the interactions between…"
Expand the phrase “inventory outputs” to “inventory processes and Nataliya Stranadko
outputs”. A variety of stakeholders contribute not only to the
outputs as a result but in many processes, which lead to the final
outputs. National inventory system should not be considered justas a start and outputs. There are many processes between thesetwo points. Some organizations can contribute to the processes but
not actually the outputs, which is basically national inventory
report to the UNFCCC and CRF tables. Thus, processes should beconsidered as part of the system.

7704

1

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

Comment ID Volume Chapter
7026
1
1

From line To line
274
347

Comment
Expert
For the sake of transparency, I would recommend some reordering: Vitor Gois Ferreira(1) the overall organizational structure, coming first, would
facilitate a general overview (331-337); (2) the inventory agency orteam (301-320); (3) the single national entity (294-300); (4) thesteering committee (321-329); (5) The mandate and supporting
legal mechanisms (275-286 plus 339-345); (6) data suppy
agreements (390-416); (7) workplans (441-485); (8) management
and archiving (486-504) After that, training and education (430437 and 505-522),

Response
Accepted

Authors' note
Text revised.

7706

1

1

274

Nataliya Stranadko

Accepted

Comment addressed during final editing.

1728

1

1

274

Renumber sections of Chapter 1 taking into account changes inlines 32-33.
It's unclear why providing information on mandate is necessary.

Melissa Weitz

Revised text to remove term "mandate" and simplified Table 1.1.

9874

1

1

274

293

This whole section on scope and mandate seems unnecessary and David Glen
confusing, using terminology that is unclear such as "mandate".
ThistlethwaiteThis detracts from any benefits to inventory stakeholders(compilers, SNE) from including this text in the guidance. Table
1.1 is first of all confusing - what is the guidance trying to say? Is
the development of a such a table regarded as a good practiceactivity? Really? It seems overly complicated and prescriptive.
Might it be easier to have a section that simply states that thecompilation and reporting of a national inventory can fulfil a rangeof mandatory and optional national reporting requirements
including (...list of examples... UNFCCC submissions, NCs,
BURs, reporting against national targets etc.) and that the precise
scope of these reporting requirements may vary (gases, territories,
bio-carbon or not etc). Put the confusing tables in a supplementary
Annex if deemed useful to retain them.

Accepted withmodification
Accepted withmodification

6776

1

1

275

275

Accepted

Text revised.

6778

1

1

277

277

Remove plurarl in "describes" to "…for national GHG inventories Raul Salas Reyes
describe what is"
Is it possible to include the activities of reporting and review?
Raul Salas Reyes

Accepted

Text revised.

6088

1

1

278

283

Recommend placing Mandate first, then Scope. The Scope isselected to ensure the Mandate can be met. Countries may also
consider future uses in establishing the Scope.

William Hohenstein

Accepted

Text revised.

7064

1

1

278

280

I would suggest that scope could also encompass geographicalAmanda Penistone
coverage (especially given that you've used the UK as an example,
where there are several different geographical coverages for thedifferent mandates)

Accepted

Text revised.

274

Revised text to remove term "mandate" and simplified Table 1.1.

Comment ID Volume Chapter
5844
1
1

From line To line
278
279

Comment
ExpertWhat is stated here is not part of the countries institutional
Vincent Camobreco
arrangements, all of this is either specified in the IPCC Guidelines
or UNFCCC reporting requirements. The information on line 280
would be the unique aspects a country would have in its
institutional arrangements

Response
Accepted withmodification

Authors' note
The paragraph has been modified to mention general principles andavoid UNFCCC reporting related aspects.

1370

1

1

280

280

"a" missing: included as well as "a" schedule for …

Regine Röthlisberger

Accepted

Text revised.

402

1

1

284

284

spelling should be "complement"

Pauline Midgley

Accepted

Text revised.

772

1

1

287

Table 1.1

Item listed as "Time Steps' in the table under 'Time Series'. What is Karachepone Ninan
this ? Please make it clearer to practitioners. Are you referring to
the time schedule of work ?

Accepted

Clarification text added.

5758

1

1

287

288

F-gases are first introduced. In the text there are specific gases
Ann Gallagher
listed that are F-gases but nowhere is the reader told whichmolecules are F-gases. In cases where the reader is expected to beusing the document to ensure his/her country is reporting
accurately or the reader is using the document to understand thedetails of climate change gases, it would be helpful for the report
to introduce each item with at least a clue. see comment re: Vol1,
Ch1 lines 85-95

Accepted

Clarification text added.

7804

1

1

287

287

Suggest replacing 'LULUCF' with 'FOLU', for consistency?

Maya Hunt

Accepted

Text revised.

10084

1

1

287

288

Insert in Table 1.1 - The cell with text 'Reporting/update' should
extend across all columns and in bold - Similar to how it appears
in Table 1.2

Neelam Singh

Accepted

Added.

1372

1

1

287

288

Table 1.1: The meaning of "reporting/update" and "frequency" and Regine Röthlisberger
the difference between the two items is not entirely clear. Would"update frequency" cover the aspect?

Accepted withmodification

Text revised.

9578

1

1

287

287

The sectors Energy, IPPU, Agriculture, Waste and LULUCF are
all in one box. May be there are countries where the responses
depending on the mandates are different from one sector to theother. Therefore, I would suggest to separate the sectors in
different boxes.

Denise Fussen YanqueAccepted withmodification

Added extra rows in table.

1730

1

1

287

This table seems unnecessary.

Melissa Weitz

Rejected

There is no sufficient grounds to remove table.

7708

1

1

287

287

Nataliya Stranadko

Rejected

774

1

1

288

Table 1.1

Karachepone Ninan

Accepted

Base year is a specific term with a specific meaning in reporting
and accounting.
Clarified that it is reporting format.

2034

1

1

289

289

In Table 1.1, column “Scope”, modify the name of the row “Start
and end year” to “Base year and end year”.
again item on 'Format' format of what. Please make it clearer forthe benefit of pratitioners.
In table 1.2, the crossing cell of column UNFCCC-NDC and row
LULUCF conatins a "NO". Since UK is part of the EU NDC thecorrect answer is "Yes". Please amend it.

Sandro Federici

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

Comment ID Volume Chapter
5982
1
1

From line To line289
289

Comment
ExpertTable 1.2: the meaning of the format "CRF17" as mentioned in the Ana Blondel
last row of this table is not clear;does it refer to the format of CRF tables as submitted in the year
2017?

Response
Accepted

Authors' note
Footnote reference corrected.

6090

1

1

289

289

Projections are not part of the inventory. Would recommend
against adding them here.

AcceptedRow for projections deleted.

5846

1

1

289

293

Seems that much of the information being shown in Table 1.2
Vincent Camobreco
deals more with accounting (e.g., NDCs, national carbon budgets)issues rather than reporting to the UNFCCC. IPCC Guidelines are
for reporting not accounting and shouldn’t be included in the IPCC
Guidelines. The note on lines 290-293, would be sufficient toprovide information to the inventory compiler that they should
think about how to integrate other ongoing activities with GHG
reporting.

Accepted withmodification

UK example moved to Box.

1374

1

1

290

293

I think that this note should be made more prominent, not just as a Regine Röthlisberger
Note to the example for Scope and Mandate of the UK. Couldn't it
be included in the main text?

Accepted withmodification

Footnote text moved to box in introduction to chapter.

7710

1

1

294

294

Renumber sections of Chapter 1 taking into account changes inlines 32-33.

Accepted

Section numbering has been revised.

299

1

1

294

300

Please add reference to 'Subnational GHG Inventory Development'. Ryan Radford
The term “Subnational” refers to a state, region, or otherjurisdiction that is not a national entity. Subnational jurisdictions
follow the same IPCC guidelines (and 2019 refinementt), GHG
inventory guidance, and reporting structure as national entities. In
addition, Subnational jurisdictions are encouraged to develop
appropriate GHG inventory management systems and follow good
GHG reporting practices outlined in the 2019 refinementt.
Subnational jurisdictions, such as the Under2 Coalition and the
Global Covenant of Mayors for Climate & Energy, are settingsome of the most ambitious climate and GHG reduction targets,
which underscores the increased importance of Subnational GHG
inventory efforts on a global scale.

Accepted withmodification

Box added to address other subnational applications of GHG
inventories. However, these Guidelines are explicitly for the
purpose of national inventories.

5848

1

1

294

300

Rejected

368

1

1

295

300

Accepted

We want to emphasize the separate roles of the responsible unit andthe technically active unit.
The comment has been addressed in SOD.

41

1

1

298

300

It’s not necessary to highlight the concept discussed here, it can be Vincent Camobreco
integrated into section 1.5.1.3
While Single National Entity is very important it will be useful if Jamidu Katima
within this entity "a GHG Inventory Officer" should be appointed.
This has worked well with "Ozone Officer"
I suggest this sectence is revised to "The role of SNE is sometimes Mingshan Su
delegated via nationally appropriate mandates/terms of reference toa relevant climate change or environmental or statistical agency
with the powers to prepare official national reports."

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

William Hohenstein

Nataliya Stranadko

Comment ID Volume Chapter
6780
1
1

From line To line299
299

Comment
ExpertSuggest to change "a relevant environmental or statistical agency" Raul Salas Reyes
to "the inventory agency"
The inventory agency (1.5.1.3) should also be mentioned in theRegine Röthlisberger
organizational structure (e.g. Fig 1.1) and in the section on
stakeholders (Table 1.3). Otherwise it may be difficult to relate thetext to the Figure and Table and the general concept. In my view,the inventory agency covers the "Management/Co-ordination
Function" described in Figure 1.1 and in table 1.3. Therefore, I
find it useful to make this explicit in the text.

Response
Rejected
Accepted

Authors' note
The sentence provides examples of government establishments that
can assume the role of the SNE.
The comment has been addresed in SOD.

1380

1

1

301

369

6782

1

1

301

320

Would it make sense to include a clarification that it is also
possible to have multiple agencies or hybrid between all theoptions mentioned?
In many cases, several different structures exist (mixes of thepossible cases shown) for different sectors. It would help to notethat possibility.
Renumber sections of Chapter 1 taking into account changes inlines 32-33.
SNE would be taken in parentheses. Thus, it would look like “Agovernment ministry (SNE)”.
replace "science" with "agency", eliminate (al): …(e.g. statistics,
meteorological, or environment(al) agency).
format of 19 should be superscript as denoting a footnote

Raul Salas Reyes

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

7028

1

1

301

320

Vitor Gois Ferreira

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

7712

1

1

301

301

Nataliya Stranadko

Accepted

Section numbering has been revised.

7714

1

1

304

305

Nataliya Stranadko

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

1378

1

1

307

307

Regine Röthlisberger

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

406

1

1

316

316

Pauline Midgley

Accepted

The comment has been addresed in SOD.

460

1

1

316

316

Number "19" corresponding to the footnote is not showed assuperscript.
What is "19"? If typo, please remove it!

Virginia Sena

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

4822

1

1

316

7066

1

1

316

Taka Hiraishi

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

316

I believe the 19 in this sentence isn't supposed to be there

Amanda Penistone

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

4824

1

1

317

9010

1

1

318

320

Suggest to add "preferably" before "over".

Taka Hiraishi

Accepted

Text revised.

Provisions should be in place for the potential transfer of"systems", tools, and knowledge from the contracted organisation
to theSNE or new contracting organisation at the end of thecontract period.
Comment: Here in this statement what is mean by transfer ofsystem? Is it means transfer of IT system?

Vishwa Bandhu Pant

Accepted

Added clarifying text.

9876

1

1

318

320

The text that is only in that third bullet point "Provisions..contract David Glen
period" surely applies to all three examples in the section 1.5.1.3? I Thistlethwaite
suggest in the first paragraph adding "…Note that for eachapproach outlined below, it is important that steps are taken to
ensure retention of institutional knowledge and capability, in orderto ensure that the inventory can continue to be delivered to achieve
quality standards into the future. Whether the inventory is
managed within Government or by external organisations,provisions should be in place for the potential tranfer of systems,
tools and knowledge to a new inventory team, including
consideration of adequate training investment."

Accepted

Added clarifying text.

Comment ID Volume Chapter
7716
1
1

From line To line
321
321

Comment
ExpertRenumber sections of Chapter 1 taking into account changes in
Nataliya Stranadkolines 32-33.
The GHG Inventory Steering Committee is an approach a country Melissa Weitz
may consider. It may be better to clearly characterize this section
as examples of approaches countries are taking.

Response
Accepted

Authors' note
Section numbering has been revised.

1732

1

1

321

Accepted withmodification

Made the text more generic.

7068

1

1

327

327

The word 'education' is superfluous

Amanda Penistone

Accepted

Text revised.

7718

1

1

330

330

Nataliya Stranadko

Accepted

Section numbering has been revised.

1

334

334

Renumber sections of Chapter 1 taking into account changes inlines 32-33.
It is written "preform" instead of "perform".

462

1

408

1

Virginia Sena

Accepted

Text revised.

1

335

336

comment is to Footnote 19: spelling should be "principles"Pauline Midgley

Accepted

Text revised.

42

1

1

336

336

Accepted

Text revised.

92

1

1

336

337

Accepted

Text revised.

464

1

1

336

336

Accepted

Implemented.

468

1

1

336

336

Accepted

Text revised.

470

1

1

336

336

Accepted

Text revised.

6556

1

1

336

Accepted

Text revised.

466

1

1

336

336

Accepted

Proposal accepted and implemented in the SOD.

6784

1

1

336

336

Accepted withmodification

Updated text to intoduce NFP in the SNE section.

7070

1

1

337

337

The contents of the parentheses in box of "Management/CoMingshan Su
ordination fuction" are incomplete.
The 'Figure 1.1 Illustrative GHG inventory or 336 ganizational
Thiago Metzker
structure' is in low resolution and has ineligible characters.
I suggest replacing a figure with high resolution.
Figure 1.1 is too small and it is not enough legible. Suggest to
Virginia Senashow it horizontally taking a whole page.
Description for chart titled "Management/ Co-ordination Function" Virginia Senais not complete (the sentence is not finished). Besides, it is written"reporting materia" instead of "reporting material"
In the second Note at the right of Figure 1.1: a dot is missing
Virginia Sena
before "Sub-divide if expertise is in… ". Besides, it is written"necessay" instead of "as necessary".
The Figure 1.1 Illustrative GHG inventory or 336 organizational
Stoécio Maia
structure" needs to be improved.
Sectors showed in the Figure 1.1 are not the ones for 2006 IPCC Virginia Sena
Guidelines. I think it is better to include AFOLU instead ofAgriculture and LULUCF.
The figure says LULUCF. Shouldn't it say AFOLU instead?. In
Raul Salas Reyes
addition, it says "focal point" but this has not yet been defined
above.
In the diagram, the words come out a little smudged and small Amanda Penistone
ideally a higher resolution would be used, and the structure would
be rearranged so the whole diagram could be enlarged by say 25%.

Accepted

Suggested editorial change implemented.

7720

1

1

339

339

Accepted

Done.

4826

1

1

341

Delete word “management”. Thus, it would look like “…inventory Nataliya Stranadko
system…”.
"data storage" should be added.
Taka Hiraishi

Accepted

Done.

6092

1

1

344

345

William Hohenstein

Accepted

Text revised.

9556

1

1

344

346

Matthew Prescott

1

1

345

Accepted withmodification
Accepted

Issue addressed in 1.5.2.2.

4828

This guidance seems beyond the scope of techncial inventory
methodological guidance.
Consider implementation of formal data-sharing agreements
between the inventory compiler and data providers.
"data storage" should be added.

7722

1

1

345

345

Accepted

Done.

6786

1

1

346

346

Accepted

Text revised.

Taka Hiraishi

Delete word “management”. Thus, it would look like “…reporting, Nataliya Stranadko
and quality to formalize…”.
The acronym QA/QC has not yet been defined.
Raul Salas Reyes

Done.

Comment ID Volume Chapter
7724
1
1

From line To line
348
348

Comment
ExpertRenumber sections of Chapter 1 taking into account changes in
Nataliya Stranadkolines 32-33.
We would not refer to these entities as "stakeholders" these entities William Hohensteinare "contributors" Stakeholders would include users and external
entities with interests in the outcomes/outputs. See use of theword "stakeholder in section 2.2.1 lines 253-254.

Response
Accepted

Authors' note
Section numbering has been revised.

6094

1

1

348

369

Accepted withmodification

We would lke to keep this broad term here for stakeholders as it
makes it easier to describe all who have an interest in the GHG
inventory. The text has been revised including a specification ondifferent types of stakeholders.

7726

1

1

349

349

Expand the phrase “inventory outputs” to “inventory processes and Nataliya Stranadko
outputs”. See explanation in line 271.
Delete word “management”. Thus, it would look like “…functional Nataliya Stranadko
national inventory system”.
Table 1.3, Row 4, Column1. "Steering committee: Note: …". I
Virginia Senasuggest to delete "Note:".
In line "Compilation (Sector) Experts" in column "typical roles": Regine Röthlisberger
Delete "Identify and propose ways to resolve cross cutting issues".
This is covered with "Coordinate with other sector experts to
identify and resolve cross sectoral issues".

Accepted

Text revised.

7728

1

1

351

351

Accepted

Text revised.

472

1

1

352

353

Accepted

Done.

1382

1

1

352

353

Accepted

Text revised.

1384

1

1

352

353

In line "Data providers" in column "typical roles":"Communication with SNE" should be changed. It is importantthat communication is not only towards SNE, but potentially also
to Sector Experts and the Management/Coordination/QA/QC.

Regine Röthlisberger

Accepted

Text revised.

1386

1

1

352

353

Accepted

Text revised.

1

352

353

In line "Policy users" in columnt "stakeholder type": I have noRegine Röthlisberger
clear understanding, what a "policy user" is. Would "policy
advisor" be more appropriate?
It is not clear what is the difference between "Formal Submission Raul Salas Reyes
of GHG inventory" and "technical submission of GHG inventory"

6788

1

Accepted

Text revised.

7030

1

1

352

352

Somehow, I feel that the research part is missing from the list ofVitor Gois Ferreira
stakeholders and they could be used to improve the inventory,
verificaiton and QA. It may be important to identify their role inthis table. Maybe this is what you have in 417-422, but the role ofresearch is not compilers

Accepted

This has been added to the "Compilation" part of the table 1.3.
Authors feel it is aligned with the sector expert role.

1734

1

1

352

Table again makes it appear that the steering committee is arequirement.

Accepted withmodification

Whole section has been revised so that it focuses on principles
rather than prescripts.

Melissa Weitz

Comment ID Volume Chapter
4802
1
1

From line To line
352
353

Comment
ExpertIn TABLE 1.3 "LIST OF STAKEHOLDER TYPES WITH THEIR Takashi Morimoto
GENERAL ROLES AND CAPABILITIES NEEDED TOFUNCTION", the term "Biennial Update Reports (BUR)" is used.
However, BUR (and BR for developed country parties) will besuperseded by new transparency reporting under the Paris
Agreement after 2020 or afterward. Since the 2019 refinementt is
expected to be used after 2020 or afterward, the way in using theterm "BUR" in this GL should be carefully considered.

Response
Accepted withmodification

Authors' note
Reference to UNFCCC and other specific reporting requirements
has been removed.

6792

1

1

352

353

In the compilation (sector) experts, we still have LULUCF. There Raul Salas Reyes
is a mix in using AFOLU and LULUCF throughout the documentthat doesn't come up as clear. I suggest alligning or clarifying.

Accepted withmodification

Terminology consolidated to consistently refer to Agriculture,
FOLU, or AFOLU.

474

1

1

352

353

Table 1.3, Row 6, Column1. Sectors are not the ones for 2006
IPCC Guidelines. I think it is better to include AFOLU instead ofAgriculture and LULUCF.

Accepted withmodification

Terminology consolidated to consistently refer to Agriculture,
FOLU, or AFOLU.

6790

1

1

352

353

Reporting under the Biennial Reports, and meeting reporting
Raul Salas Reyes
requirements of the ETF under the Paris Agreement could also be
included.

Noted

No action can be taken because comment is out of scope of 2019
Refinement.

5850

1

1

352

353

An important issue for many countries is the need for external
Vincent Camobreco
funding (e.g., GEF) to support their inventory development. It
may be useful to include in this table information on whichstakeholder type should access GEF funding. There may be otherlocations in the chapter where this might fit better into the flow ofthe discussion as well.

Noted

No action can be taken because comment is out of scope of 2019
Refinement.

410

1

1

354

354

copy edit: presumably should read " there are two useful steps "Pauline Midgley

Accepted

Text revised.

476

1

1

354

354

Virginia Sena

Accepted

Text revised.

1364

1

1

354

354

Regine Röthlisberger

Accepted

Text revised.

1388

1

1

354

354

It is written: "However, there two..." instead of: "However, there
are two...".
"are" missing in 2nd sentence: However, there "are" two usefulsteps for the coordination"are" missing: However, there "are" two …

Regine Röthlisberger

Accepted

Text revised.

4290

1

1

354

354

I suggest that the authors add "are" after "there".

Naofumi Kosaka

Accepted

Text revised.

5984

1

1

354

354

Accepted

Text revised.

6656

1

1

354

369

Word seems to be missing: should it be "there are two useful
Ana Blondel
steps..." instead of "there two useful steps…"?
A verb is missing 'However, there two useful steps...' and it seems Tarja Tuomainenthat there is only one useful step.

Accepted

Text revised.

7730

1

1

354

355

Modify the current sentences to the following two sentences: “The Nataliya Stranadko
process of stakeholders’ coordination is country-specific.
However, there two useful steps to be considered for building thisprocess”.

Accepted

Text revised.

Virginia Sena

Comment ID Volume Chapter
10086
1
1

From line To line354
354

Comment
ExpertMissing word 'are' as shown inserted here - ….However, there 'are' Neelam Singh
two useful steps for…..

Response
Accepted

Authors' note
Text revised in line with other comments.

43

1

1

354

369

It is stated that in line 354 and 355 "However, there two usefulsteps 354 for the coordinationand management of stakeholders." But only one step is describedin 356 to 369. There is no second step in this section.

Accepted withmodification

Edited text to refer to only one element.

1390

1

1

354

369

In line 354, it is stated that there are two useful steps for theRegine Röthlisberger
coordination and management of stakeholders. On line 356, thefirst step is presented. However, the second step seems missing.
Either add the second step or change line 354 accordingly to "auseful way for the coordination and management of stakeholders"instead of "two useful steps for ..."

Accepted withmodification

Edited text to refer to only one element.

9558

1

1

354

355

Matthew PrescottAccepted withmodification

Edited text to refer to only one element.

5986

1

1

354

369

Ana Blondel

Accepted withmodification

Edited text to refer to only one element.

1736

1

1

356

Melissa Weitz

Accepted

Text modified.

412

1

1

356

356

Pauline Midgley

1

1

363

369

Regine Röthlisberger

Accepted withmodification
Accepted

Edited text to refer to only one element.

1392

Text revised.

7732

1

1

367

367

"However, there two useful steps for…". There appears to be
information missing here, and only one "step" (List of
Stakeholders) is shown.
Line 354 refers to "two useful steps", however the following lines
only mention the list of stakeholders,
where is the second step?
This again seems unnecessary and should again be framed as an
approach some countries are taking, but not necessarily should bea requirement.
the first "useful step" is mentioned but the second is not identified
as far as I can tell. I am guessing it would be the list of datasets
Are "engagements to date" in line 363 "inventory activities" as inline 367? Or what is the meaning of engagements to date?
Delete word “management”.

Nataliya Stranadko

Accepted

Text revised.

6794

1

1

369

369

Remove "etc".

Raul Salas Reyes

Accepted

Text revised.

7734

1

1

369

369

Nataliya Stranadko

Accepted withmodification

Edited text to refer to only one element.

7736

1

1

370

370

Nataliya Stranadko

Accepted

Section numbering has been revised.

9984

1

1

370

375

Mausami Desai

RejectedFig 1.2 is important for highlighting the importance ofunderstanding the data flows for the inventory.

414

1

1

373

373

Line 354 states about two steps of the process. However, thissection describes only first step – list of stakeholders. The second
step is missing here.
Renumber sections of Chapter 1 taking into account changes inlines 32-33.
Figure 1.2 does add much value and is confusing - can be moved
to annex or or data collection. If included in an annex thenrecommend focusing on data flows for a specific category as an
example.
copy edit; "An" not "And"Pauline Midgley

Accepted

The comment has been addresed in SOD.

478

1

1

373

373

It is written: "And illustrative..." instead of: "An illustrative...".

Virginia Sena

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

1394

1

1

373

373

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

5988

1

1

373

373

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

7072

1

1

373

373

Correct spelling of inventory compilation. Currently, it reads
Regine Röthlisberger
complication.
Should be "compilation" instead of "complication", and should be Ana Blondel"An" instead of "And"
Instead of 'And', use 'An'
Amanda Penistone

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

Mingshan Su

Comment ID Volume Chapter
6796
1
1

From line To line
375
376

Comment
Figure 1.2 has many acronyms that might be confusing. I would
suggest to keep a simpler language in the figures.
Renumber sections of Chapter 1 taking into account changes inlines 32-33.
The data could also be collected in a table indicating the different
aspects in lines 382 - 289. Additionally, an example could be
helpful for future users of the guidelines (as the table in line 287).

ExpertRaul Salas Reyes

7738

1

1

379

379

9580

1

1

379

389

7032

1

1

379

1396

1

1

7740

1

9560

Authors' note
Editorial: The text has been simplfied accordingly.

Nataliya Stranadko

Response
Accepted withmodification
Accepted

Denise Fussen YanqueAccepted

The comment has been addressed in the SOD.

389

This is too much detail and may not be necessary under thisguidance

Vitor Gois Ferreira

Accepted withmodification

Text revised.

380

380

Here, the role of GHG invenotry coordinator is introduced.
Regine Röthlisberger
However, in the section above, this role has not been introduced. If
this role is used in other chapters, maybe it would be wise todefine it (or allocate it to the inventory agency/management andcoordination). If GHG inventory coordinator is not used in otherchapters, the term should be replaced by e.g. inventory agency or
management and coordination entity.

Accepted withmodification

Revised to "Inventory Agency".

1

390

390

Renumber sections of Chapter 1 taking into account changes in
Nataliya Stranadkolines 32-33.
A data supply agreement should also include a provision that the Matthew Prescottreceiving party provide feedback to the supplier in order that
continuous improvement of data collection can be achieved.
sometimes it is also helpfull to fix the role and the obligation of the Michael Strogies
data provider for the case of questions or problems during review
activities. Could be added as proposal.
needs clarification with a word relating "cooperation" and "the data Pauline Midgley
supplier .."I am not sure the syntax of the sentence is correct. Then, theVirginia Sena
meaning of the sentence is not clear for me.
"between" missing: … any co-operation "between" the data
Regine Röthlisberger
supplier…
Text not clear, some words may be wrong or missing. Maybe it
Ana Blondel
should be something like"reference to laws/terms of reference and any co-operation
between the data supplier and the GHG inventory
representatives;"?

Accepted

Section numbering has been revised.

1

1

390

416

Noted

Accepted

Bullet added on feedback provisions that enable the receiving party
provide feedback to the supplier to promote continuous
improvement of data collection
The comment has been addressed in the SOD.

9710

1

1

398

412

416

1

1

400

400

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

480

1

1

400

400

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

1398

1

1

400

400

Accepted

The comment has been addresed in SOD.

5990

1

1

400

400

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

7074

1

1

400

400

Suggest inserting 'between' between the words 'co-operation' and'the'
Renumber sections of Chapter 1 taking into account changes inlines 32-33.
Delete the word “management”.

Amanda Penistone

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

7742

1

1

417

417

Nataliya Stranadko

Accepted

Section numbering has been revised.

7744

1

1

418

418

7746

1

1

419

419

Nataliya Stranadko

Accepted

Text revised.

Delete the word “will”. Thus, it would look like “These experts
understand the requirements…”.
Renumber sections of Chapter 1 taking into account changes inlines 32-33.

Nataliya Stranadko

Accepted

Text revised.

7748

1

1

423

423

Nataliya Stranadko

Accepted

Section numbering has been revised.

Section numbering has been revised.

Comment ID Volume Chapter
7750
1
1

From line To line424
424Comment
ExpertModify the current sentence to the following sentence: “SomeNataliya Stranadko
roles and responsibilities for the GHG inventory team are outlined
in…”.
I would suggest to include examples on the most common roles
Raul Salas Reyes
and responsabilities, instead of sending the readers to yet anotherguidance document. For example, discussing the lead inventory,
the lead QA/QC, the sectoral experts, etc.

Response
Accepted

Authors' note
The comment has been addressed in SOD.

6798

1

1

428

428

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

370

1

1

429

437

Train of Trainers should be recommended in order to build
national training capacity - this will be more sustanable - a rosterof traners should be maintained by the Single National Entity

Jamidu Katima

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

7752

1

1

429

429

Nataliya Stranadko

Accepted

Section numbering has been revised.

1

430

430

Renumber sections of Chapter 1 taking into account changes inlines 32-33.
Delete the word “management”.

7754

1

Nataliya Stranadko

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

6800
6802

1

1

432

437

Include numbering in each key of the three key areas.

Raul Salas Reyes

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

1

1

432

433

It is not entirely clear what the key area is

Raul Salas Reyes

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

10088

1

1

432

437

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

4292

1

1

432

432

6804

1

1

436

436

Insert bullets or numbers to distinguish the three key areas listed
Neelam Singhhere
I suggest that the authors replace "updated 2006 IPCC Guidelines" Naofumi Kosaka
by "2019 refinementt".
Is is possible to include the IAR as well?
Raul Salas Reyes

Accepted withmodification
Rejected

7756

1

1

438

438

Accepted

10090

1

1

439

440

Renumber sections of Chapter 1 taking into account changes in
Nataliya Stranadkolines 32-33.
Suggest rephrasing: Workplans, data management sytems, QA/QC Neelam Singhsystems, and documentation procedures 'are examples of tools thatcan be incorporated in inventory management systems to' facilitate
the 'compilation of inventory and' delivery of inventory outputs.

Editorial: Agree. Made the text less specific to latest/relevant IPCC
guidelines.
We have referred more generally to international review processes.
ICA/IAR etc come under this general term.
Section numbering has been revised.

Accepted

Revised text.

7758

1

1

441

441

Nataliya Stranadko

Accepted

Section numbering has been revised.

7034

1

1

441

441

Renumber sections of Chapter 1 taking into account changes inlines 32-33.
Reference to improvement plans may be missing in this section

Vitor Gois Ferreira

7760

1

1

443

443

Not clear what does this sentence mean?

Nataliya Stranadko

Accepted withmodification
Accepted

Reference to improvement plans has been included in Ch.3, section
3.1.2 of SOD.
The comment has been addressed in SOD.

7076

1

1

443

443

Suggest 'communicates' rather than 'communicate'

Amanda Penistone

Accepted

Text revised as proposed.

Comment ID Volume Chapter
9878
1
1

From line To line
444
446

Comment
ExpertSection 1.5 has some good material but I think need consideration David Glenof the overall structure and flow of the guidance. The authors need Thistlethwaite
to decide what the guidance is seeking to achieve. The section
includes multiple bullet point lists etc could be better to place into
an Annex, and the table 1.4 on illustrative annual workplan would
be a prime candidate. This table and other sections that follow
seem disjointed and lacking in clarity - e.g. who manages andsigns off the workplans - the SNE or the IA?. What about parallel
inventory improvement projects and workplans / steering groups
for that type of activity?

Response
Accepted withmodification

Authors' note
Editorial: Boxes and tables have been used for some of thismaterial. The lists have been further clarified and explained.

6806

1

1

445

446

Is is possible to change the title "Indicative deadlines" with
"illustrative deadlines" or "examples of deadlines"?

Raul Salas Reyes

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

9988

1

1

445

446

Is there a way to combine or integrate this workplan with the
Mausami Desaiexisting cycle and within compilation steps section which was not
updated (section 1.6)? Seems like a box on activities that acountry might undertake to implement a step, generalized to theextent possible and clearly noted as examples could an option to
fold in much of the new content using a more streamlined
approach?

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

6808

1

1

445

446

482

1

1

445

446

Accepted withmodification
Accepted withmodification

Terminology consolidated to consistenly refer to Agriculture,
FOLU, or AFOLU.
Terminology consolidated to consistently refer to Agriculture,
FOLU, or AFOLU.

1400

1

1

445

446

LULUCF is also used here byt I would think AFOLU would be
Raul Salas Reyes
more appropriate
Table 1.4, Row 5, Column1. Sectors are not the ones for 2006
Virginia Sena
IPCC Guidelines. I think it is better to include AFOLU instead ofAgriculture and LULUCF.
in columnt "example activity" line "sectoral estimation",
Regine Röthlisberger
agriculture and LULUCF are listed separately. In some otherinstances, AFOLU is used. It seems as if the updated to the 2006
GLs is using Agriculture and LULUCF, while the existing versionof the 2006 GLs is refering to AFOLU. This is inconsistent andshould be changed. Presumably, this also applies to other chaptersand other volumes.

Accepted withmodification

Terminology consolidated to consistently refer to Agriculture,
FOLU, or AFOLU.

6810

1

1

446

446

Is is possible to include a brief description on review and revision Raul Salas Reyesof workplans. For example, when should they be reviewed, whenshould they be revised, how can these workplans be formalised,
who should keep trak on the tasks, and what happens if a deadline
is not met.

Accepted

Text revised.

372

1

1

447

Need to elaborate on data storage / archaving (with backaup) the
problem we are facing in developing countries is that each
inventory almost starts from scratch, data of past inventory ishardly tracerable. There should be sime guidance on how data
should be stored and archaved for future retreaval and use

Accepted

Text added to emphasize archiving.

Jamidu Katima

Comment ID Volume Chapter
7762
1
1

From line To line
447
447

9880

1

1

447

485

9986

1

1

447

7764

1

1

6812

1

1402
6814

Comment
Renumber sections of Chapter 1 taking into account changes inlines 32-33.
The section on data management systems is not clear on its
purpose - it strays from talking about different types of models to
how to control / manage the full range of models in a national
system, and then goes on to cover details that are really applicable
to good practice for individual models which would be better
presented elsewhere in the guidance (Ch6), such as the bulletpoints about colour coding, within-model documentation and soon. Also the list presented under Collation Aggregation andReporting which is cited as "the minimal information in astandardised data structure for time series data.." (really?) is very
prescriptive and would perhaps be better presented as a worked
example in an annex?

ExpertNataliya Stranadko

Response
Accepted

Authors' note
Section numbering has been revised.

David Glen
Thistlethwaite

Accepted withmodification

Table revised to introduce purpose of lists. And prescriptive
language removed.

485

Recognize intent, but need to consider in adding this section are
Mausami Desai
we designating these as a good practices. With all newsections
included in Chapter 1, this should be considered and theimplication for countries following this guidance for reporting. So,
have similar concerns with data management systems, could thisbe again integrated into compilation steps as a box, but very
important to convey these are some practical approaches tomanaging inventory information but it is not comprehensive, etc.
This content seems more appropriate for supplementary guidance
but not critical to methodol guidance. Is there another format ordesignation for such guidance? The section also does not note useof worksheets, reporting tables or existing data
management/software tools (2006 GL, ALU software, etc.) thatfacilitate some of these steps and are available when applying tier
1 or some tier 2 approaches included this guidance. Recommend
finding a more general way to include this content.

Accepted withmodification

Table revised to introduce purpose of lists. And prescriptive
language removed.

448

448

Rewrite the current sentence to the following sentence: “TheNataliya Stranadko
process of GHG inventory preparation involves a large number ofdatasets compiled using an array of…”.

Accepted

Text revised.

1

449

449

I would suggest to avoid using negative language, in this caseremove the " no GHG inventory has a fully..."Raul Salas Reyes

Accepted

Text revised.

1

1

452

452

"to" missing: available for users "to" upload data…

Regine Röthlisberger

Accepted

Text revised.

1

1

452

453

Raul Salas Reyes

Accepted

Word "country" added.

6816

1

1

452

452

Raul Salas Reyes

Accepted

Text revised.

7078

1

1

452

452

It is not clear what the "many" in "Many currently operate..." isrefering to.
Include "to" in "for users to upload data and operate from remotelocations"
Suggest 'to' between 'users' and 'upload'

Amanda Penistone

Accepted

Text revised.

Comment ID Volume Chapter
9562
1
1

From line To line452
452

Comment
missing "to": "...the internet and available for users to upload…"

7766

1

1

454

454

6818

1

1

462

7768

1

1

9882

1

10092

ExpertMatthew Prescott

Response
Accepted

Authors' note
Text revised.

Calculation and estimation are synonyms. It would be appropriate Nataliya Stranadko
to change a phrase “Calculating GHG Estimates” to “GHG
Calculation” or “Calculation of GHG emissions”.

Accepted withmodification

SOD text changed to also recognize calculation of removal
estimates.

463

I would like to suggest to include: Documenting metadata on thefirst page of each file

Noted

486

486

Accepted

1

486

504

Renumber sections of Chapter 1 taking into account changes in
Nataliya Stranadkolines 32-33.
Good to have a section that links onward to the QAQC Chapter 6, David Glenbut surely as the key purpose of section 1.5 is to set out theThistlethwaite
National System and the institutional framework, then the very
thing that ought to be covered here - i.e. which organisation has
responsibility for what component of the QAQC system, whoshould engage / steer / manage / fund the QA Plan and the QA
activities etc - is missing from section 1.5.4.3. The text here is agood succinct introduction to QAQC, but the authors need to add
some details of good practice as regards the institutional
responsibilities, communication and co-ordination (e.g. pointing
back to the role of a national steering committee).

The detail can be reduced. The issue is already addressed in second
bullet of "Calculating of GHG Estimates" subsection. No change
has been made in the text.
Section numbering has been revised.

Accepted

Text revised to briefly discuss institutional responsibilities for
QA/QC.

1

1

486

504

Placement issue - The guidance on QA/QC pertaining to a GHG
inventory management system should be added in appropriate
sections in Chapter 6 (Volume 1) itself. Placing it here requires
moving back and forth between Chapter 1 and Chapter 6.

Neelam Singh

Accepted

Text revised to briefly discuss institutional responsibilities for
QA/QC.

7770

1

1

487

487

Delete the word “management”.

Nataliya Stranadko

Accepted

Text revised.

6820

1

1

498

498

Raul Salas Reyes

Accepted

Text revised.

7772

1

1

505

505

Nataliya Stranadko

Accepted

Section numbering has been revised.

38

1

1

505

522

Is it possible to include in the example: improvements frominternational review processes?
Renumber sections of Chapter 1 taking into account changes inlines 32-33.
Nice to see this section included, but it is rather vague at the
moment - provision of some exemplars (e.g. US EPA, UK
DEFRA, FAO and similar websites that make these data easily
accessible would be useful). FAO also provide some very usefuleducational tools for emissions MRV in the AFOLU sector that
could be flagged as exemplars to follow at a national level (e.g.
http://www.fao.org/elearning/#/elc/en/course/NGHGI)David Reay

Accepted withmodification

Text revised to clarify text on public access. However box with
examples of public communication has not been included becausesuch references are likely to be transient.

Raul Salas Reyes

Comment ID Volume Chapter
9992
1
1

From line To line
505
522

Comment
ExpertRecognize intent, but adding this section are we saying that
Mausami Desaieducation, awareness etc. is a good practice? With all sections
included in Chapter 1, this should be considered and theimplication for countries following this guidance for reporting.
This could be noted on any outreach materials associated with therefinementt (?). Recommend considering how this can be
integrated in a more general way with compilation steps andrevising any content to convey neutrality of outputs. Further, rows
515-522 are not clearly listed as example activities (not mandatoryor necessary to apply good practice). The guidelines are intended
to produce a policy-neutral estimate of emissions andterms/framing here needs to be more sensitive to this. Stakeholder
roles in improving data and QA can be discussed in Chapter 2 and
6? Feel it is important to convey here that awareness needs toconvey the objective/neutral (?) nature of the estimates that result
from application of the guidance and that this information is a tool
to inform decision making, input to models, etc.

Response
Accepted withmodification

Authors' note
Section 1.5.5. has been moved to a Box and emphasized that public
outreach is part of a broadly defined national GHG inventory
system. Text revised to be more general and clear.

6732

505

3)In addition to line 505, section 1.5.5 – Education, awarenessraising and public access to information, “TED videos andMuseum exhibition” can also increase educational awareness.

Accepted

Text has been further edited for readability.

1

1

505

Onema Adojoh

General Comment: Overall, the story-line is very comprehensive
but some of the sentences seems to be monotonous, perhaps thiscan be reduced during the final compilation.

9564

1

1

505

522

Could include in this section a note that documentation which
Matthew Prescottexplains the key methodological differences between the national
GHG inventory and other estimates of GHG emissions (e.g.
National Statistics Environment Accounts) is useful for data users.

Noted

No action can be taken because comment is out of scope of 2019
Refinement.

10094

1

1

505

522

This section should be as much about education, training and
Neelam Singhcapacity building as about awareness raising and public access to
information - especially if it's placed under National Inventory
Management Systems. Currently, the section is heavily focused onawareness raising though the section heading talks about otheraspects too. Suggest giving adequate attention to other aspects too- some suggested edits below.

Accepted

Text revised and futher mention of education made.

Comment ID Volume Chapter
5590
1
1

From line To line
505
522

Comment
Awareness raising and communication of results shall be moreemphasised, therefore extension of 1.5.5 subchapter may beneeded by for example communication platforms, innovative
communcation channels which can be useful to decision-makers
and national experts

ExpertAttila Buzasi

Response
Rejected

Authors' note
Detailed guidance on public outreach is deemed out of scope forrefinement and IPCC Guidelines. The section as presented isintended to only recognize that a national inventory system, broadly
defined, should consider public outreach issues that will promote
the GHG inventory activities and outputs to enhance thesustainability and continuous improvement of the GHG inventory
system. But, the IPCC does not intend to provide detailed techincal
guidance on this topic.

10096

1

1

507

511

Merge the two paragraphs into 1.

Neelam Singh

Text revised.

10098

1

1

509

509

Insert sentence after '..engagement and decisions.': EducationNeelam Singhrelated activities aimed at those in relevant government ministries,
departments and agencies can help develop technical capacity,enhance cooperation, and improve knowledge about how theinventory outputs may be utilized in analysis and decision making.

Accepted withmodification
Accepted withmodification

10100

1

1

510

510

Insert these phrases as shown here in single quotation marks Wider use and awareness of the GHG inventory 'and its purpose'
can 'strengthen capacity of and' better engage stakeholders to
improve data quality….

Neelam Singh

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

10102

1

1

512

512

Delete 'also'

Neelam Singh

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

7774

1

1

512

512

Change the word “work” to “processes”. Thus, it would look like“…the GHG inventory processes and outputs…”.

Nataliya Stranadko

Accepted

The term "work" has been changed and text revised.

10104

1

1

514

514

Delete 'including:' Insert - 'Some examples of such activities
include:'Neelam Singh

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

10106

1

1

515

515

Insert sentence at the end: These can range from technicalworkshops focused on overall inventory results or on specificsectors to awareness raising events for mass media

Neelam Singh

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

7080

1

1

520

520

Suggest 'to' between 'support' and 'the'Amanda Penistone

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

4804

1

1

520

520

The term "BUR" is used in this sentence. However, BUR (and BR Takashi Morimotofor developed country parties) will be superseded by newtransparency reporting under the Paris Agreement after 2020 orafterwards. Since the 2019 refinementt is expected to be used after2020 or afterwards, the way in using the term "BUR" in this GL
should be carefully considered.

Accepted

2019 Refinement cannot reference specific reporting requirements.
Text revised to refer to generic international reporting processes.

6822

1

1

520

520

I would suggest to include Biennial Reports (BRs) as well

7776

1

1

521

522

The sentence “Development of the GHG inventory as a tool to
Nataliya Stranadko
support projections and the quantitative analysis of GHG savingsin policies and measures” is nor clear. To support projects of
what? What does mean “GHG savings in policies and measures”?

Accepted withmodification
Accepted

Refinement cannot reference specific reporting requirements. Text
revised to refer to generic international reporting processes.
Text clarified.

Raul Salas Reyes

Suggested text in comment ID 10100 has been used.

Comment ID Volume Chapter
7778
1
1

From line To line
523
523

Comment
Renumber sections of Chapter 1 taking into account changes inlines 32-33.

ExpertNataliya Stranadko

Response
Accepted

Authors' note
Revised.

6824

1

1

706

Would it make sense to include in the references section thereference for the EPA tables suggested?

Raul Salas Reyes

Accepted

Added.

4842

1

1

Table 1.1

It is unclear as to what 'time steps' means in the left column,
although we can guess a little from Table 1.2. Would 'Projections
for every 5th year' suffice?

Elsa Hatanaka

Accepted

Footnote added.

4844

1

1

Table 1.4

This might be better expressed by calling it an example from a EU Elsa Hatanaka
country, since it does not necessarily seem to be a standard
schedule even across developed countries.

Accepted

Editorial: Agree.

5254

1

1

Due to increasing regional and international trade, it is
Mingming Wang
recommended that IPCC requires nations to report emissions
associated with imported/exported goods/services and reportconsumption-based emissions alongside production-based
emissions. This will provide more comprehensive evidence basefor a more holistic approach to climate action planning and policy
making. IPCC would need to provide relevant account/reporting
guidelines too.

Noted

No action can be taken because comment is out of scope of 2019
Refinement.

5256

1

1

Considering increasing global waste trade, it is recommended that Mingming Wang
IPCC requires nations to report emissions associated with waste
imported and exported where applicable. This will provide theevidence base for a more holistic approach to climate action
planning and international negotiations and policy making.

Noted

No action can be taken because comment is out of scope of 2019
Refinement.

8546

1

1

so many places GHG is given. Better if we write as GHGs because Amanullah Dr.
on page 4 many gases have been reported

Accepted

8548

1

1

I did not found citation in the whole chapter better if we include
new citation in the text.

Amanullah Dr.

Accepted

Editorial: Agree. Edited where GHG should refer to GHGs but not
where GHG is used in describing the inventory or management
systems
New citations included in the the SOD.

8550

1

1

In refernces section only few refernces are given and most of them Amanullah Dr.
are very old. We must include new literture of 2018, 2017, 2016
and so on.

Accepted

New references have been considered in the update of the SOD.

9990

1

1

Try to cross-reference where to find information in other chapters, Mausami Desaiespecially if information is already there otherwise appears as if weare increasing the complexity of this guidance.

Accepted

More cross-references added.

706

Comment ID Volume Chapter
5248
1
1

From line To line

Comment
ExpertAs being raised by UNFCCC and many other
Mingming Wanginternational/regional /national initiatives, non-state actors are
critical to addressing climate change, especially cities given thatcities account for 70% of global GHG emissions. Therefore it isrecommended that IPCC provides guidance for cities and othersub-national governments to report GHG emissions, or at least
makes reference to existing reporting frameworks such as the
Global Protocol for Community-Scale GHG Emission Inventories(GPC). Launched at COP20, the GPC is an international bestpractice standard developed by C40 in partnership with ICLEI and
WRI with support from World Bank and UN Habitat. The GPC iscurrently the most referenced framework by cities that voluntarily
report emission to the Carbon Disclosure Project. More details
available at www.c40.org/gpc

Response
Accepted withmodification

Authors' note
Box added to address other subnational applications of GHG
inventories. However, these Guidelines are explicitly for the
purpose of national inventories.

5250

1

1

As cities consume over two-thirds of the world's energy andMingming Wangaccount for more than 70% of global CO2 emissions, it is strongly
recommended that IPCC considers how national inventories can be
improved to enable better emissions accounting at city level. At
C40 Cities, an international organisation focused on city-levelclimate actions, we have helped over 60 large cities worldwide
develop GHG inventories so far. Based on our experiences andcity feedback, cities often do not have access to good quality citylevel activity data or emission factors and thus have to scale down
national inventories, which leads to low quality of city inventory
and policy making. On the other hand, national government often
have more access (and sometimes the only access) to data on
various levels. Therefore and to overcome the challenges faced bycities, it is recommended that IPCC requires national GHG
inventory reports to provide: 1) spatially disaggregated activity
data, emission factors and/or emissions data at city level (or othersub-national level), or at least for the sectors where cities struggle
most with obtaining local data (i.e. energy industries, fugitive
emissions, aviation, IPPU, AFOLU etc.); and 2) a list of large
point sources (e.g. industrial facilities, power stations etc.) anddata at point source/facility level. This move will also help withvertical integration of climate action planning and policies between
different levels of government.

Accepted withmodification

Box added to address other subnational applications of GHG
inventories. However, these Guidelines are explicitly for the
purpose of national inventories. Therefore, IPCC does not havemandate to require spatial disaggregation except where it istechnical good practice for the purpose of producing TACCC
national estimates.

4840

1

1

(General Comment) For Inventory compilation, current draft isTaka Hiraishi
extremely difficult to use, because it is partial and does not cover
all the required actions. It is advisable to produce complete set of
guidelines as amended by merging original relevant guidelines andrefinementts, at a later stage. Soft (computer file) package may
suffice.

Rejected

IPCC decided to prepare a “2019 Refinement to the 2006 IPCC
Guidelines for National GHG Inventories” (2019 Refinement),
which do not replace the 2006 IPCC Guidelines but to be used inconjunction with the 2006 IPCC Guidelines. Consolidating all
methodological guidance into a single report would require a new
IPCC decision.
However, guidance has been included in the Overview Chapter on
how to use this report in conjunction with the 2006 IPCC
Guidelines and other IPCC Methodology Reports.

Comment ID Volume Chapter
9540
1
2

From line To line
1
1297

Comment
Expert
Add guidance for the development of country-specific emission
Philip DeColafactors, focusing on developing countries. It was reported inseveral research papers that global emission estimates based on
default emission factors and activity data for some chlorinatedcompounds do not match observed atmospheric concentration
trends (see Fig 1-3, 1-4 in Carpenter et al., 2014). That kind of
mismatch is to become evident when national inventory reports are
summed up for UNFCCC in the global stock take stage (to be donein 2023, 2028 and further) and compared to actual rate of global
average concentration change for those compounds. To avoid
discrepancy, adjustment should be made to default emission
factors (used in Tier 1 procedures), based on present atmosphericconcentration trends and global activity data. Common proceduresfor data collection presented in Chapter 2, do not yet provide
recommendations for use of atmospheric concentration trends foradjusting EFs, we strongly encourage the authors to consider
adding such guidance. Some useful context can be found here:
http://www.globalcarbonproject.org/reccap/ and here
http://www.globalcarbonatlas.org/en/content/welcome-carbon-atlas

Response
Noted

Authors' noteNo action can be taken because comment is out of scope of 2019
Refinement.

4350

1

2

36

37

Upper or lower case letters?

Accepted

Typo corrected.

7626

1

2

46

757

In several places throughout Chapter 2, the new refinementt text
Deborah Ottinger
needs to be better integrated into the old 2006 Guidelines text.
Currently, there are sometimes competing organizational schemes
and/or redundancies.

Noted

The SOD text and structure has been revised to remove
redundancies across the chapter.

8552

1

2

47

no need of this sentence

Accepted

Sentence removed.

7852

1

2

47

47

I am guessing these types of sentences are going to be removed in Raul Salas Reyes
the last version

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

7780

1

2

48

48

Replace a phrase “any system” to “national inventory system”.

Nataliya Stranadko

AcceptedPhrase replaced.

7854

1

2

48

48

Suggest to include "greenhouse gas" where it says "to regularly
estimate and report emissions". It will then say "to regularly
estimate and report greenhouse gas emissions"

Raul Salas Reyes

Accepted

Text included.

10134

1

2

48

49

Add after ranging from national statistical agencies, "from line
Wafa Aboul Hosn
ministries, economic sectors including financial and non-financial
corporations such as industries, trade, transport, service sectors
etc. as well as government, households and others."

Accepted withmodification

Different change made according to all the comments.

Kewei Yu

Amanullah Dr.

Comment ID Volume Chapter
7856
1
2

From line To line
49
50

Comment
ExpertSentence "and industry sources to academia will" seems confusing. Raul Salas Reyes
I suggest to rephrase this sentence to "network of data providers
ranging from national statistical agencies, internationalorganizations, trade, academia, and industry sources will be
expected to provide information on an annual basis."

Response
Accepted withmodification

Authors' note
Different change made according to all the comments.

5756

1

2

51

52

This is the key to the document: "Data collection is the first, and Ann Gallagher
possibly the largest interactions between the inventory compilers
and other stakeholders". The concept of interaction could beemphasized more through out the rest of the document by writing
sentences to include reminders and examples. Reminders related tomeaning or implication; examples offering the reader inspiration.

Accepted

Words changed.

7782

1

2

51

51

Expand a phrase “the largest interactions” to “the largest part ofinteractions”.

Nataliya Stranadko

Accepted

Comment addressed in the SOD. According to lines 73-75 of SOD
as follows: "During the data collection for the greenhouse gas
inventory, interactions between the inventory compilers andstakeholders will take place, which may require the most time inthe compilation process".

10136

1

2

51

51

Add after direct collection of data " from administrative records
and from monitoring stations, in coordination with the statisitcal
system in place"

Wafa Aboul Hosn

Accepted

Text added.

7860

1

2

51

52

Where it says "Data collection is the first, and possibly the largest Raul Salas Reyes
interactions between the inventory compilers and otherstakeholders". There are interactions with other stakeholders even
before data collection, for example, when first establishing anational GHG inventory system, stakeholder consultations areheld. Also, the phrase "largest interactions" reads a bit confusing. I
would suggest to rephrase this paragraph to keep it more simple. A
suggestion would be "Interactions between the Inventory Agency
and stakeholders will take place during the data collection for the
GHG inventory, which may require the most time in thecompilation process".

Accepted withmodification

Different change made according to all the comments.

7082

1

2

51

51

interaction' rather than 'interactions'

Amanda Penistone

Accepted

Text changed as proposed.

98

1

2

51

52

the statement presented should appear before line 50-51. This will Chukwuma Anoruo
expand the view of inventory compiers.

RejectedPhrase deleted as it confuses according to some comments. Nochange was made in the text.

418

1

2

51

51

copy edit: "the largest interactions" should be "the largest of theinteractions"

Pauline Midgley

RejectedPhrase deleted as it confuses according to some comments.

7858

1

2

51

51

I would suggest to change the words "inventory compiler" with
"Inventory Agency" to keep an allignment with wording from
Volume 1 Chapter 1 section 1.5.1.3

Raul Salas Reyes

RejectedPhrase deleted as it confuses according to some comments.

Comment ID Volume Chapter
1404
1
2

From line To line
52
52

Comment
eliminate (s): … possibly the largest interaction(s)ExpertRegine Röthlisberger

Response
Accepted withmodification
Accepted

Authors' note
Different change made according to all the comments.

2454

1

2

53

65

The development of figure showing process diagram may give
more understanding to the reader or compiler.

Pornphimol
Winyuchakrit

7628

1

2

53

56

Long sentence can be simplified by adding period to end of first
Deborah Ottinger
line after "inventory," eliminating subsequent "and" andcapitalizing "It," adding period after "identified" in line 55,
deleting "and then focusing," capitalizing "Resources," and adding"can then be focused" immediately afterward.

Accepted

Sentence simplified.

1738

1

2

53

55

Perhaps note that such inventory compilers that they should aim
Melissa Weitz
for completeness, and for the next inventory focus on
improvements?
Include "the" between "starting inventory". This then will read to Raul Salas Reyes"When starting the inventory compilation"
Not clear what the phrase "expending too much effort so" means. Raul Salas Reyes
Also, I would suggest to clarify who will require the effort, why it
is not suggested to spend to much effort, and how would it besuggested to do so.
The list of examples of possible key categories should include
Ana Blondel"forest management", which is a key category formost countries with established inventories
What is the 'it' in this sentence: "it should be easier with the
Ann Gallagher
relationships and processes already established."? Why not change
to adding categories should be easier…
Should "year" be "inventory cycle" so that this is applicable to all Melissa Weitz
countries developing ghg inventories?
"However, every year, inventory compilers should always be
Ann Gallagher
prepared to consider new data sources should they become
available." Of course they should be prepared but what has thisdocument done to let them know what being prepared looks like?
Why not add an example or two? While you don't want the
document to be budensome to read, it seems awaking the reader topossibilities they might not have considered would make theguidelines more useful.

Accepted withmodification

A diagram is added to the chapter.

7862

1

2

53

53

Accepted withmodification
Accepted

Different change made to clarify the issue.

7864

1

2

54

54

5992

1

2

57

58

Accepted

Key category added.

5762

1

2

58

59

AcceptedPhrase added.

1740

1

2

59

59

Accepted

Precision about the time frequency was deleted.

5764

1

2

59

60

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

1742

1

2

61

65

This guidance should be identical to (or reference) guidance on NE Melissa Weitz
sources.
This section uses a word “sources” with two meanings: data
Nataliya Stranadko
sources and sources of GHG emissions. Therefore, to be clearer, aphrase “new sources or sinks may be identified” should be
modified to “new sources of GHG emissions or sinks may be
identified”.

Accepted

Text included.

7784

1

2

61

61

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

7868

1

2

61

61

Include the word "inventory systems" after "In establishedinventories". This will then read as "In established inventory
systems"

Accepted

Text included.

Raul Salas Reyes

Inserted.

Clarification added.

Comment ID Volume Chapter
5766
1
2

From line To line
62
63

Comment
Expert"In these cases, it is good practice to estimate if the source or sink Ann Gallagher
strength is comparable with key categories in order to assess theeffort required." Sure but what does that calculation imply? I
assume it is indicating that if a new source or sink is estimated to
be on a scale similare to the KEY categories then it should bereported by the country. But the guide does not say that. Maybe it
only means the category should to further evaluated and will not
contribute to totals reported, yet. But the guide does not say that,either. Which is intended? Please clarify.

Response
Accepted

Authors' note
Added to the text "if a new source or sink is estimated to be on ascale similar to the key categories then it is good practice to use
Tier 2 or 3 method".

44

1

2

62

63

1

2

63

63

Pauline Midgley

Accepted withmodification
Accepted

Clarified into the paragraph.

420
7630

1

2

63

63

Deborah Ottinger

Accepted

Text moved.

7036

1

2

66

66

Vitor Gois Ferreira

Accepted

Text moved to the beginning of the introduction.

7632

1

2

66

74

Deborah Ottinger

Accepted

Text moved to the beginning of the introduction.

7866

1

2

66

74

Raul Salas Reyes

Accepted

Text moved to the beginning of the introduction.

422

1

2

69

69

Pauline Midgley

1

2

69

69

1406

1

2

76

88

Accepted withmodification
Accepted withmodification
Accepted withmodification

The whole text changed according to all comments.

5768"source or sink strength" is difficult to understand. Please add anote to explain it.
suggest changing "to assess" to read: "to assess and prioritise",which is what is discussed later in the chapter
Regarding "source or sink strength is comparable with key
categories:" It is important to remember that categories can be key
due to trend as well as magnitude. May be good to move
discussion of key category from lines 68-70 here.
Please consider moving "Data1collection is an integral part ofdeveloping and updating a greenhouse gas inventory" to 48
This old text is valuable but needs to be better integrated into the
new text.
After reading it a couple of times, I believe that this section would
read better between lines 52 and 53.
copy edit: should read either "taking into account" or "taking
account of"
Change "taking account the results of key category analysis" to"taking account of the results of key category analysis"
In this list, there are three items refering to data collection
activities and inventory improvement (lines 79/80, lines 81/82,
lines 86/87). They should be merged into one single item, e.g.
"chose and regularly review data collection procedures to guideprogressive and efficient inventory improvement". The aspect
regarding "methodological needs" in line 86 is covered in line 83.

8900

1

2

76

Accepted withmodification

Text modified according to all comments.

424

1

2

78

78

Accepted

Text changed.

5770

1

2

78

81

It would be beneficial to initiate this list with an assessment ofRoberta Quadrelli
what data exist/planned across institutions nationally (e.g. relevant
ministries, NSOs, ect).
copy edit: for consistency with other items in this list, these should Pauline Midgley
be active verbs, i.e. " identify, evaluate and document the available
data sources"
Consider adding a bullet to inspire readers to create data sources Ann Gallagherthat are not currently in existance. A person in a country justgetting started recording a new source can outline the way
information could be collected thus creating a new source rather
than relying only on the available data sources as per the rest of thechapter.

Accepted

Text changed.

7636

1

2

78

78

For consistency with other bullets, recommend changing "ing"endings to imperative, i.e., "identify, evaluate, and document."

Accepted

Bullet added.

Mingshan Su

Ann Gallagher
Regine Röthlisberger

Deborah Ottinger

Text added.

The whole text changed according to all comments.
Text modified according to all comments.

Comment ID Volume Chapter
7634
1
2

From line To line
81
86

Comment
Lines 81 and 86 appear to be redundant

7638

1

2

84

85

7786

1

2

84

84

426

1

2

84

84

4352

1

2

85

For consistency with other bullets, recommend changing toDeborah Ottinger"integrate the collection of uncertainty information into datacollection. . ."Modify a phrase “the collection of uncertainty information” to “the Nataliya Stranadko
collection of information about uncertainty”.
copy edit: for consistency with other items in this list, this should Pauline Midgley
be an active verb, i.e. " collect uncertainty information, which is an
integral part of ..."
Chapter 3, upper case in all other places.
Kewei Yu

8904

1

2

88

line 88 could fit under line 78 as relates to same concept

Roberta Quadrelli

4354

1

2

101

data sets or datasets, be consistent

Kewei Yu

7870

1

2

106

8554

1

2

108

7040

1

2

116

120

7872

1

2

118

118

1408

1

2

119

120

1744

1

2

119

120

7084

1

2

119

120

7640

1

2

119

120

428

1

2

122

122

1410

1

2

122

122

Last sentence is not clear: how can guidelines be applied to activity Deborah Ottinger
data in the absence of available activity data?
copy edit: "compilers acquire data" should read "compilers toPauline Midgleyacquire data"
insert "to": compilers "to" acquire data…
Regine Röthlisberger

5994

1

2

122

122

Missing "to" between "compilers" and "acquire"106

ExpertDeborah Ottinger

Response
Accepted withmodification
Accepted

Authors' note
Text modified according to all comments.

Accepted

Text adjusted.

Accepted withmodification

Different change made according to all the comments.

Accepted

Words adjusted.

Accepted withmodification
Accepted

Different change made according to all the comments.

I would suggest to include a paragraph describing how data supply Raul Salas Reyes
agreements support the data collection process and when should
these be established in the data collection process. This will also
assist to have some connection with Volume 1 Chapter 1 section
1.5.2.2 DATA SUPPLY AGREEMENTS

Accepted withmodification

Is emphasized in the text.

remove text no need

Accepted

Text removed.

Rejected

These two paragraphs are relevant to the chapter.

Accepted

Text changed.

Accepted withmodification

Text clarified.

Accepted withmodification
Accepted withmodification
Accepted withmodification
Accepted

Text clarified.

Accepted"to" inserted.

Accepted"to" inserted.

Amanullah Dr.

These two paras appear to be not relevant here. Consider moving Vitor Gois Ferreiraor deleting
It is not clear to which guidelines the paragraph is refering to in
Raul Salas Reyes"Following these guidelines, it should…" does it refer to the 2019refinementt? If so, I would suggest to rephrase as "Following the2019 refinementt, it should be possible to provide a…"
I am not sure if I understand the sentence correctly: "In the absence Regine Röthlisbergerof available activity data, applying these guidelines to activity data
will allow estimates based on either surrogate information or
expert judgement." How can you "apply these guidelines toactivity data", in particular "in the absence of available activity
data"? Should it read "In the absence of availabel activity data,
applying these guidelines will allow estimates based on either
surrogate information or expert judgement."?

This sentence is unclear. "In the absense of available countryspecific emissions data"?
Do you mean in the absence of emissions factors?

Melissa Weitz
Amanda Penistone

Ana Blondel

Phrase modified.

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

Text clarified.
Text clarified.
"to" inserted.

Comment ID Volume Chapter
7086
1
2

From line To line
122
122

Comment
Suggest 'to' between 'compilers' and 'acquire'ExpertAmanda Penistone

Response
Accepted

Authors' note"to" inserted.

8902

1

2

123

Similarly to previous comment, it would be benficial to start thislist with assessing what data exist/are planned across insitutions

Roberta Quadrelli

Accepted withmodification

8906

1

2

124

Roberta Quadrelli

Accepted

10138

1

2

124

124

Wafa Aboul Hosn

1

2

126

126

Pauline Midgley

Accepted withmodification
Accepted

Different change made according to all the comments.

430

it may be benficial to rephrase from "ask" to "engage incooperation" - in some cases, working groups and MoUs may beneeded2."Establish a coordination mechanism with data providers to
obtain "tailored
copy edit: "form" should be "from"

This paragraph is concerned with the process acquiring the data.
Instead, the comment has been considered in the paragraph dealing
with establishing a system for continuous improvement.
Rephrased.

1412

1

2

126

126

Regine Röthlisberger

Accepted

Replaced.

4356

1

2

126

correct spelling: "from" instead of "form" at the beinning of theline.
replace "form" with "from".

Kewei Yu

Accepted

Replaced.

5772

1

2

126

126

Change 'form' to 'from'.

Ann Gallagher

Accepted

Replaced.

5996

1

2

126

126

"from" instead of "form"

Ana Blondel

Accepted

Replaced.

6360

1

2

126

126

it is suggested that 'form' be replaced with 'from'Accepted

Replaced.

7088

1

2

126

126

from' instead of 'form'

Emmanuel Jonthan
Mpeta
Amanda Penistone

Accepted

Replaced.

7874

1

2

126

126

Accepted

Replaced.

9566

1

2

126

126

Change word "form" to "from". It will then read as "from financial Raul Salas Reyes
year to calendar year"
typo: suggest “from financial year to …”
Matthew PrescottAccepted

Replaced.

8908

1

2

128

131

I do not follow how the logics of point 4 is reflected in the
Roberta Quadrelli
structure of the chapter. To reflect this list, the sectin on Generate
new data (2.2.2) should include sections on measurements, census
and surveys within it (as listed under points i), ii) and iii)), Whilefollowing structure is inconsistent with this list.

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

8910

1

2

128

131

Accepted

Added to the text.

10140

1

2

130

130

It would be beneficial to also add a point on adapting existing
Roberta Quadrelli
surveysInventories focal points can not do surveys on their own…Change Wafa Aboul Hosn
to ii) Use Census and Surveys data iii) Coordinate with National
Statistical Offices to undertake new surveys targeting inventories
relevant sectors

Accepted

Text changed.

10142

1

2

131

131

Inventories focal points can not do surveys on their own…Change Wafa Aboul Hosn
to ii) Use Census and Surveys data iii) Coordinate with National
Statistical Offices to undertake new surveys targeting inventories
relevant sectors

Accepted

Text changed.

4846

1

2

133

133

It seems paradoxical that 'a last resort' would be 'good practice'.
Since line 121 generally covers this item as well, would 'As a lastresort, use expert judgement' be enough?

Accepted

Text adjusted.

Elsa Hatanaka

Replaced.

Comment ID Volume Chapter
7876
1
2

From line To line
136
136

Comment
ExpertI would also suggest to include a paragraph on how can the
Raul Salas Reyes
improvements be also included as part of next years' workplan andthat the Inventory Agency has to continiously review and updatethese accordingly"

Response
Accepted

Authors' note
Its relevance has been considered and added to the text of the SOD.

5776

1

2

137

137

Change "Is it for a complete calendar year?" to "Does the data
represent collection for a complete calendar year?" For somereaders, English will not be the first language so precision andclarity should be considered. If possible reduce the use of
pronouns; spell out the point of the statement.

AcceptedPhrase changed.

7644

1

2

137

137

Recommend adding "and/or the entire population of sources within Deborah Ottinger
the source category" after "territorial area of the inventory."

Accepted

Changed.

7878

1

2

137

137

Change ":" to a question mark. It will then read as "Is it complete? Raul Salas Reyes
Does it cover the entire territoral area of the inventory?..."

AcceptedPhrase added.

9712

1

2

137

137

add also the test: is it complete - does it cover the entire activity for Michael Strogies
a source category? (important in case of using ETS data.. There isoften a threashold value in place.. so there are only very few
categories covered completely by ETS data.

Accepted withmodification'and/or the entire population of sources within the source category"
was added instead.

5774

1

2

138

138

Change "How can expressed in terms of two standard deviations?" Ann Gallagher
to "Can uncertainty be expressed in terms of two standard
deviations?"

Noted

The text has been completely revised.

432

1

2

138

138

1

2

138

138

1414

1

2

138

138

1746

1

2

138

138

3340

1

2

138

138

Accepted withmodification
Accepted withmodification
Accepted withmodification
Accepted withmodification
Accepted withmodification

Text corrected as "How can this uncertainty be expressed in terms".

484

copy edit: "How can be expressed" should read "How can this be
expressed"
It is written: "How can expressed ..." instead of: "How can be
expressed...".
incomplete sentence, insert "it be": … How can "it be" expressedin terms …
This sentence is missing a word.

5998

1

2

138

138

Accepted withmodification

Text corrected as "How can this uncertainty be expressed in terms".

6362

1

2

138

138

Text corrected as "How can this uncertainty be expressed in terms".

7090

1

2

138

138

7880

1

2

138

138

Accepted withmodification
Accepted withmodification
Accepted withmodification

Ann Gallagher

Pauline Midgley
Virginia Sena
Regine Röthlisberger
Melissa Weitz

Should move from 2 sd (which is defined for known distributions) Justin Bishop
to IQR or other combination of percentiles to avoid assuming an
underlying distribution
Some word is missing; should it be "Can be expressed in terms of Ana Blondel
two standard deviations?"
instead of "How can expressed in terms of two standard
deviations?"?
proposed to insert 'it be' between 'can and expressed'
Emmanuel Jonthan
Mpeta
Suggest 'it be' between 'can' and 'expressed'
Amanda Penistone
The question "How can expressed in terms…" is not clear. I would Raul Salas Reyes
suggest to clarify what is this referring to or rephrase.

Text corrected as "How can this uncertainty be expressed in terms".
Text corrected as "How can this uncertainty be expressed in terms".
Text corrected as "How can this uncertainty be expressed in terms".
Text corrected as "How can this uncertainty be expressed in terms".

Text corrected as "How can this uncertainty be expressed in terms".
Text corrected as "How can this uncertainty be expressed in terms".

Comment ID Volume Chapter
9568
1
2

From line To line
138
138

Comment
typo: "How can expressed in…"

ExpertMatthew Prescott

Response
Accepted withmodification
Noted

Authors' note
Text corrected as "How can this uncertainty be expressed in terms".

9998

1

2

138

138

Somehow important for guidance to recognize that many datasets Mausami Desaido not include uncertainty including national datasets and could
refer users also to sections relevant to gathering expert judgement
while in parallel working with data provider to develop this in
future publications of the data. This should also be listed I thinklast in terms of points checked.

1416

1

2

139

139

insert "s": What assumption"s" underlie the data?

Accepted"s" added.

6364

1

2

139

139

proposed to replace 'E.g.' with 'e.g.'

Emmanuel Jonthan
Mpeta
Recommend adding new bullets "What measurement methods are Deborah Ottinger
used? Are they reliable?" and "Are time series consistent?"
Remove the "(E.g.)" and just keep the questions. It will then read Raul Salas Reyes
as What assumption underlie the data? is a survey representative?
Is a census complete?
The use of "E.g. is a survey representative? Is a census complete?" Ann Gallagher
is a helpful and sensible contribution to the document.
assumptions' instead of 'assumption'
Amanda Penistone

Accepted

Text added.

7642

1

2

139

140

Accepted

The "Eg" removed.

7882

1

2

139

139

Accepted"s" added.

5778

1

2

139

139

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

7092

1

2

139

139

7884

1

2

140

140

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

Raul Salas Reyes

Accepted

Words changed.

Matthew PrescottAccepted

Added to the text.

Raul Salas Reyes

Accepted

Clarified.

143

I would suggest to change the words "inventory compiler" with
"Inventory Agency" to keep an allignment with wording from
Volume 1 Chapter 1 section 1.5.1.3
Feedback mechanism, to provide comments/questions from thecompiler to the data provider, should be formalized in the data
supply agreement.
It is not clear what "This" is referring to in "This includes thesource of the data…"
It is not clear what "any processing" refers to

9570

1

2

140

141

7886

1

2

142

142

7888

1

2

142

Raul Salas Reyes

Accepted

Clarified.

7890

1

2

9170

1

2

143

143

It is not clear what "This" is referring to in "This will allow…"

Raul Salas Reyes

Accepted

Clarified.

143

145

Here is the first case (of many) in the text where the absence of a Peter Riggs
specific category for wood pellets and other biomass fuels can led
to bad assumptions about the lifespan of these products. Are we tounderstand wood pellets for bioenergy as a short- or long-lived
product?

Rejected

Issues about biofuels are handled in other chapters.

1418

1

5780

1

2

144

144

insert "s": to reduce the resource"s" required

Accepted"s" inserted.

2

144

145

What does this "to reduce the resource required for data collection Ann Gallagher
in subsequent years" mean? Are the collectors/reporters of data
reducing the effort required? Perhaps collectors/reporters are
reducing the expendature of resources required. Please clarify
meaning.

Accepted

Examples added.

7892

1

2

144

144

Accepted

Text added to highlight the resources required which are mainly
human, time and financial resources.

7894

1

2

145

145

1

2

146

147

Accepted withmodification
Accepted

Added to the paragraph.

1420

I would suggest to add examples in the types of resources required Raul Salas Reyes
where it says "to reduce the resource required". For example, thiscan be referring to human resources, time resources, financial
resources, etc. I feel this can be clearer.
I would also suggest to include a paragraph on how data supply
Raul Salas Reyes
agreements can assist.
Text in 2nd box in first column: replace "existing resources" with Regine Röthlisberger"available resources"

Regine Röthlisberger

Regine Röthlisberger

Already considered in the text.

Corrected.

Comment ID Volume Chapter
45
12

From line To line
146
146

434

1

2

146

146

488

1

2

146

147

1422

1

2

146

147

1424

1

2

146

147

1426

1

2

146

147

1428

1

2

146

147

4294

1

2

146

147

4358

1

2

146

4830

1

2

146

5782

1

2

146

147

5784

1

2

146

147

5786

1

2

146

147

Comment
ExpertThere are spelling errors in "Can the inventry provider madify the Mingshan Su
dat to meet the inventory needs"
copy edit: there are several typos in the text boxes of the figure - Pauline Midgleyplease check carefully
Figure 2.1 - In the third square chart, third column, second
Virginia Senasentence. Typing errors. It should be written: "This may involve anannual inventory activitiy"
Text in 3rd box in second column: spelling of inventory missing an Regine Röthlisberger"o" (1st line), modify instead of madify (2nd line), data instead ofdat (2nd line)
Text in 3rd box in third column: insert "l" in involve, spelling ofRegine Röthlisberger
inventory (3rd line)
Text in 1st box in fourth column: Add "n" in understanding (4thRegine Röthlisbergerline). What is meant by "understanding"? Memoranda ofunderstanding?
There is a flaw in the logic of the pattern: If data is satisfactory,
Regine Röthlisberger
complete, with uncertainty information and with reasonableassumptions (top box in second column), it goes to "consider how
to establish long-term relationship" (top box in fourth column),
only to be checked again for completeness, uncertainty andassumptions. I think, this shoul be by-passed, as already checked at
the top.

Response
Accepted withmodification
Accepted withmodification
Accepted withmodification

Authors' note
A new diagram is inserted.

Accepted withmodification

A new diagram is inserted.

Accepted withmodification
Accepted withmodification

A new diagram is inserted.

Accepted withmodification

A new diagram is inserted.

I suggest that the authors reconsider the decision tree because
Naofumi Kosaka"Check data is complete, has uncertainty information and any
assumptions are reasonable" will be done twice if the answer to thefirst question (Is there a published source of this data?) is yes.
Data Collection - letter case?
Kewei Yu

Accepted withmodification

A new diagram is inserted.

Accepted withmodification
Accepted withmodification
Accepted withmodification
Accepted withmodification
Accepted withmodification

A new diagram is inserted.

Figure 2.1 contains a typo, "madfy", which should rather be"modify".
Change "inventry" and "invntory" to "inventory".

Taka Hiraishi
Ann Gallagher

Change "Modify Data" to "Have the inventory provider modify the Ann Gallagherdata".
Clarify "Consider how to establish long-term relationships withAnn Gallagher
data provider, including possible agreements, understanding, andjoint activities". Perhaps "Establish long-term relationships withdata providers. Consider the use of agreements, memorandums ofunderstanding, and collaborative activities"

A new diagram is inserted.
A new diagram is inserted.

A new diagram is inserted.

A new diagram is inserted.
A new diagram is inserted.
A new diagram is inserted.
A new diagram is inserted.

Comment ID Volume Chapter
6000
1
2

From line To line
146
146

Comment
Figure 2.1: This outline and the chapter in general assume that
there is always a way to collect data, at least using expert
jugement.
There might be cases where not even this last resort (expert
jugement) is suitable given the lack of relevant knowledge or theextremely high level of uncertainty that this AD may have. Thisoutline should provide an additional path for these special cases,suggesting for example to develop the relevant knowledge within
the country on the category/activity in question as resources
available permit.

ExpertAna Blondel

Response
Accepted withmodification

Authors' note
A new diagram is inserted.

6002

1

2

146

146

Figure 2.1: several typos in this figure should be corrected

Ana Blondel

A new diagram is inserted.

6366

1

2

146

147

This is in fig 2.1: it is suggested that these words 'can the inventry Emmanuel Jonthan
provider madify the dat to meet the inventory needs' be replaced
Mpetawith ' can the inventory provider modify the data to meet theinventory needs'

Accepted withmodification
Accepted withmodification

6368

1

2

146

147

This is in fig. 2.1: it is suggested that these words 'consider how to Emmanuel Jonthan
establish long-term data supply. This may invove an annual
Mpeta
invnetory activity' be replaced with 'consider how to establish longterm data supply. This may involve an annual inventory activity'

Accepted withmodification

A new diagram is inserted.

7094

1

2

146

146

several typos in diagram

A new diagram is inserted.

7896

1

2

146

146

In figure 2.1 where it says "Is the data satisfactory? Check data is Raul Salas Reyes
complete…" it is not clear what "uncertainty information" means. I
would suggest to clarify this term before the figure so that thereaders can have an idea of what type of information with regards
to uncertainty is expected.

Accepted withmodification
Accepted withmodification

8912

1

2

146

147

Possible to add a question upfront to assess whether a mapping of Roberta Quadrelli
all relevant sources exist or need to be done.

Accepted withmodification

A new diagram is inserted.

8914

1

2

146

Sometimes data exchange may occur even for data that are not yet Roberta Quadrelli
published or not published at all, if there is an agreement. This
could actually help timelinessAccepted withmodification

A new diagram is inserted.

8916

1

2

146

Several typos in content of various boxes in flow chart (inventry;
invnetory; understading;..). Use of capital letters and punctuation
is inconsistent

Roberta Quadrelli

Accepted withmodification

A new diagram is inserted.

9996

1

2

146

This seems unnecessary and can be confusing to consider in
conjunction with decision trees in sectoral chapters, recommend
removing.

Mausami Desai

Accepted withmodification

A new diagram is inserted.

146

Amanda Penistone

A new diagram is inserted.

A new diagram is inserted.

Comment ID Volume Chapter
486
12

From line To line
146
147

Comment
ExpertFigure 2.1 - In the third square chart, second column. Typing
Virginia Senaerrors and "compiler" instead of "provider". It should be written:"Can the inventory compiler modify the data to meet the inventory
needs?"
This section highlights the need for a consistancy of terms. The
Ann Gallagher
inventory collector, the data collector, the data provider, inventory
compiler, data suppliers, and the invertory reporter need to be
defined and used consistantly.
There seem to be duplicated statement. Proposed text for lines
Regine Röthlisberger
150-153: Delete the first sentence (Oftern working with a … data
provider.). Leave the second sentence "It is good practice…
subsequent years." Change third sentence as follows: Delete (DataCollection steps and decisions) in line 152.

Response
Accepted

Authors' note
The comment has been addressed in SOD.

5792

1

2

149

165

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

1430

1

2

150

153

Accepted

Redundancy deleted.

7898

1

2

150

151

Paragraph "It is good practice to establish long151
term relationships with data producers to reduce the resources
required for data collection in subsequent years." is repeated with
144-145
Data sources can change so see benefit to moving the opening
content as sub-bullet in the exsting text, or at end of paragraph atline 167.
include after the word "longterm" the passus "and sustainable".
This means the data provision should be independent fromindividual relations.
What does this "to reduce the resource required for data collection
in subsequent years" mean? Are the collectors/reporters of data
reducing the effort required? Perhaps collectors/reporters are
reducing the expendature of resources required. Please clarify
meaning.

Raul Salas Reyes

Accepted withmodification

Modified according to other comments.

10000

1

2

150

153

Mausami Desai

Rejected

Isn't relevant to this content.

9714

1

2

151

151

Michael Strogies

Accepted withmodification

Deleted from that line for redundancy and added above.

5788

1

2

151

151

Ann Gallagher

Accepted

Deleted for redundancy and clarified above.

9572

1

2

152

152

typo: "…Data Collection steps and decisions relationships with…" Matthew PrescottAccepted

Modification adopted.

5790

1

2

152

153

Change: "Developing long-term Data Collection steps and
Ann Gallagher
decisions relationships with data suppliers can lead to mutual
benefits. Improved understanding of the data will improve theinventories and may lead to improvements in the original data." isjumbled. Suggested: Codifying data collection decision trees andcollection steps with the data suppliers can lead to benefits foreveryone. An improved understanding of the data could lead to
improved inventories. Original data might be adjusted to reflect
reporting needs."

Noted

Removed according to other comments.

7096

1

2

2400

1

2

152

152

remove 'decisions' from this sentence

Amanda Penistone

Noted

Removed according to other comments.

154

155

It is important to consider top-down data scientists as "suppliers".
Concerted effort should be undertaken by the IPCC inventorycommunity to better understand work from Saunois et al.

Fiji George

Noted

No action can be taken because comment is out of scope of 2019
Refinement.

Comment ID Volume Chapter
744
12

From line To line
160

Comment
Expert
The formulation „regular informal updates on the methods that use Lenka Zetochovátheir data” is very general and uncertain please consider revision ofthis sentence or add more explanation about the meaning

Response
Accepted

Authors' note
Changed in text.

8918

1

2

161

NSO could be in list

Changed in text.

7646

1

2

173

174

"Wherever possible the use of confidential data should be
Deborah Ottinger
avoided." This statement is overly broad. Often, data that is criticalto the development of precise and accurate inventories isconfidential at the level of individual facilities or other entities.
However, it can still be used with little loss of transparency if it
can be aggregated so that the facility-specific data are masked. The
old text from the 2006 Guidelines includes good guidance on thispoint.

Accepted withmodification
Accepted

7900

1

2

173

174

I would suggest to rephrase the first paragraph to "It is good
Raul Salas Reyes
practice to avoid using confidential data as this confidential data
can lead to an inventory lacking transparency. However, avoiding
the use of confidential data may not always be possible and so, it isa good practice that inventory compilers..."Accepted withmodification

Text revised.

4848

1

2

175

175

Confidential data are inherently untransparent. Would 'inventory
compilers take the following steps to 'minimize' this issue' bebetter?

Noted

The Guidelines intend to encourage taking these steps in order tominimize the issue. No change has been made in the text.

7648

1

2

179

195

The concept of aggregation is mentioned on lines 179, 183, 185, as Deborah Ottinger
well as 195. It is not clear what the difference is among thesebullets/statements.

Accepted

Text adjusted.

5794

1

2

181

181

"derive a mutually acceptable data sets" should be "derive mutually Ann Gallagher
acceptable data sets".

Accepted

Adjusted.

5796

1

2

183

190

Note: Lines 525-529 for an excellent model of clarity. The use of Ann Gallagher"option" make the information highly accessible.
Suggested: 2.
When confidentiality cannot be avoided ways to aggregate or mask
the data should be investigated (see 3).
3. Aggregation of smaller subcategories may be possible toaggregate the emission estimates into a larger category to avoid
breaking the confidentiality. Aggregation techniques should beselected to avoid the possibility that the confidential data could bereconstructed using the published inventory.
4. If masking or aggregating data is unsuccessful at preserving
confidential data, it may be appropriate to look at other sources ofdata and avoid the use of confidential data favoring greatertransparency of the final inventory. Attention should also be paid
to any reporting guidelines (such as those from the UNFCCC) thatmight apply.

Accepted"," added.

Roberta Quadrelli

Elsa Hatanaka

Rephrased.

Comment ID Volume Chapter
6096
1
2

From line To line
183
184

Comment
ExpertNot clear, recommend rewording. Missing a comma? Sentence William Hohensteinneeds to be clear what is the "this" that could be done? Redundantwith lines 198-201

Response
Accepted

Authors' note
The comment has been addressed in SOD.

7902

1

2

183

183

Add "," in between "avoided ways". This will then read as "Where Raul Salas Reyes
the confidentiality cannot be avoided, ways to aggregate or mask
the…"

Accepted

Suggestion adopted.

4296

1

2

184

184

I suggest that the authors clarify "below". Does it mean "3. For
smaller subcategories..."?

Accepted

Clarified.

4850

1

2

185

187

Accepted

Text added.

4298

1

2

188

188

Accepted

Clarified.

4852

1

2

189

190

Accepted

Deleted.

7042

1

2

191

191

It would be useful to add to this 3. that care should also be taken to Elsa Hatanaka
minimize the aggregation as much as possible so as to be astransparent as possible.
I suggest that the authors clarify "above". Does it mean "3. For
Naofumi Kosaka
smaller subcategories..."?
Paying attention to e.g. UNFCCC Guidelines seems universal
Elsa Hatanaka
across all issues in the IPCC Guidelines. Is it necessary to mention
it here especially?
Nowadays the issue is not only relevant for NSA, but also for
Vitor Gois Ferreira
nation-wide inventories related to GHG, such as EU-ETS. Theseother examples could also be mentioned here, because the issues
involved are similar

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

1432

1

2

231

236

The text is partyl duplicated. Proposed text for lines 231-236,
Regine Röthlisberger
delete text in (), insert text in "": While every effort should bemade to collect data needed and its associated uncertainties fromthe approaches discussed below, (there may remain cases when nodata is available and then the inventory compiler will need to rely
on expert judgement to provide the information. When collecting
data,) there may be some exceptional cases when no inventory data
is available, and expert judgement must be used. Experts should be
asked to estimate the missing data based on their expertise. In
order to (indicate) "initiate" such discussions and to provide astarting point for their considerations the following inputs can beused:

Accepted

Text adopted.

5798

1

2

231

233

Suggestion: Despite endeavoring to collect all the data anddocument all of the data's associated uncertainties, there might becases when no data is available. Then the inventory compiler[collector/reproter?] will need to rely on expert judgement toprovide information. Comment: Are you sure you want people to
make "every" effort?

Ann Gallagher

Accepted withmodification

Adjusted taking into account all comments.

6098

1

2

231

236

William Hohenstein

1

2

231

236

436

1

2

232

235

Accepted withmodification
Accepted withmodification
Accepted withmodification

Paragraphs merged and revised.

7904

These two paragraphs say essentially the same thing. Merge andedit.
Paragraphs 231-233 and 234-236 are very similar. Would it bepossible to merge them to avoid repetition?
these two sentences seem to be duplicates; surely only one isneeded?

Naofumi Kosaka

Raul Salas Reyes
Pauline Midgley

Paragraphs merged.
Paragraphs merged.

Comment ID Volume Chapter
5800
1
2

From line To line
234
236

Comment
ExpertSuggestion: In exceptional case, when no inventory data is
Ann Gallagher
available expert judgement must be used. Experts should be asked
to estimate the missing data based on their experience. As astarting point for expert estimations consider the following:

Response
Accepted withmodification

Authors' note
Redundancy deleted.

7650

1

2

234

235

Redundant with 231-233

Adjusted taking into account all comments.

5802

1

2

237

238

7044

1

2

237

244

Accepted

Deleted.

5804

1

2

239

239

Accepted

Text changed.

9574

1

2

240

240

Accepted

Text added.

5806

1

2

240

240

Suggestion: If there are other countries with sectors in a similar
Ann Gallagher
stage of economic development, management practices and/or soilclimatic conditions consider extrapolating from the similarcountry's reports.
The purpose of this list under expert judgement is not clear, given Vitor Gois Ferreira245-246. Maybe, deleting 245-246
Suggestion: Experts might be able to infer national data fromAnn Gallagher
regional information with uncertainties.
Surrogate data could include financial flows (national accounts
Matthew Prescottdata and price data).
Can someone add examples of statistaclly related or physically
Ann Gallagher
related information? By 'parameters needed' do we mean theinformation gap? "There may be information that is statistically or
physically related to the parameters needed."

Accepted withmodification
Accepted

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

7906

1

2

241

241

Accepted withmodification

Adjusted taking into account all comments.

5808

1

2

242

242

Accepted withmodification

References have been added to table.

7908

1

2

242

242

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

1748

1

2

243

244

Rejected

The chapter doesn't deal with the NE sources.

6004

1

2

245

246

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

Deborah Ottinger

I would suggest to rephrase this paragraph to simplify. This is my Raul Salas Reyes
suggestion: "Some industrial sources may not occur in all
countries.""...data on trade and product often provide ways to check."
Ann Gallagher
Consider changing to "...data on trade and production often
provide ways to confirm the existeance of an industry within the
country." Are there examples of internation data sites of value?
Are UN reports (http://research.un.org/en/docs/reports) a sensible
example for the reader to consider? See line 559 Table 2.3 for atidy chart of sources of information.
I would suggest to clarify what does "product" refers to in the last Raul Salas Reyes
sentence.
This needs to be consistent with guidance on NE. And, it needs to Melissa Weitz
be clarified how order of magnitude estimates can be "used."
Directly in the GHG Inventory? Or for planning purposes?
Same as my first comment for Line 146, Figure 2.1
Ana Blondel

Text adopted.

Comment ID Volume Chapter
6826
1
2

From line To line
247
273

Comment
ExpertGathering existing data is one of the most crucial requirements for Onema Adojoh
comprehensive study on climate change. Thus, adding databasefrom most 3rd world countries will improve a substantial link toacquiring existing data as most emissions of greenhouse gases arebasically linked to the regions. This is because, there are lessregulations in controlling greenhouse emission when compared todeveloped countries, thus more existing data can be sourced fromthere (line 247-273).

Response
Accepted withmodification

Authors' note
Reference to regionally specific databases has been considered inmany sections of the SOD.

Comment is on Volume 1 not Volume 2 - section on gathering
Mausami Desaiexisting data. The list combines some national data sets withgeneral types of data. The list should be organized in a moreconsistent way, so example faciltiy level data sets can be organized
like international databases. Place GHGHRP and EU ETS as
subset of facility level data as examples, and they are not the only
countries/regions with reporting programs (Australia, Canada, etc.
include other examples, and maybe even Mexico?)Accepted withmodification

The list of databases has been reorganised. Examples on datasets
for worldwide, regional and facility-level have been provided.

List should include relevant ministries, e.g. for energy: Ministry of Roberta Quadrelli
energy; Energy Agencies; etc for other activity data.
Delete sentence "Note that it is unlikely that this type of data is
Domenico Gaudioso
directly usable in emission inventories." A number of GHG
inventories of EU Member States, in fact, (e.g. Croatia, Hungary)
directly use ETS data as a source for emissions estimates for the
IPPU sector. The text should not result in an invitation not to use
this information, in particular for emissions estimates for the IPPU
sector, which is verified according to the ETS Directive, provided
it is representative of the entire IPCC categories.

Accepted withmodification
Accepted withmodification

The list has been reorganised taking into account other comments.

Emmanuel Jonthan
Mpeta
Amanullah Dr.

Accepted

Added.

Accepted

Removed.

Accepted

Reference has been considered and added.

It is also, important to expand specific sector for each organizationby thinking outside the table (Table 2.2) (Line 532). For instance,
shipping companies and abattoir constitute significant of waste
into the dis-tributary rivers, streams, ocean, and sea duringtransportation and animal processing respectively.

9994

1

2

248

274

8920

1

2

249

348

1

2

251

252

6370

1

2

254

254

it is suggested to add 's' at the end of petro-chemical plant

8556

1

2

255

265

remove dots at the end of each category

350

1

2

257

257

Insert a reference to the EMEP/EEA air pollutant emission
Domenico Gaudioso
inventory guidebook 2016. This document provides country
specific information, in particular for European countries, such as
emission factors for combustion processes and sources for activity
data for chemical processes.

The sentence is modified as the following: "Note that this type ofdata are not always directly usable in an emission inventory".

Comment ID Volume Chapter
7046
1
2

From line To line
258
273

Comment
ExpertSome rearranging could be made, because FAO databases could be Vitor Gois Ferreira
together with 258
should state that this is US EPA's GHGRP
Pauline Midgley

Response
Accepted

Authors' note
The list has been reorganised taking into account other comments.

438

1

2

265

265

1434

1

2

265

Accepted

The list has been reorganised taking into account other comments.

265

Shouldn't this be merged with lines 250-252? If not merged, I think Regine Röthlisberger
it should be moved upwards, directly after line 252, as it is also
concerned with facility level data.

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

4854

1

2

265

265

Is the GHGRP referred to here from the USA? If so, this should be Elsa Hatanaka
mentioned as such, or generalize the term to include all mandatory
GHG Reporting programs.

Accepted withmodification

The list has been reorganised taking into account other comments.

10144

1

2

271

272

Update There are recent satellite imagery and geospatial that areavailable Earth Observation, Sentinel and many others

Wafa Aboul Hosn

Accepted

Updated by Earth Observation, Sentinel etc.

6372

1

2

272

272

it issuggested 'et al' be replaced with 'et al.,'Accepted

Replaced.

5852

1

2

273

273

Emmanuel Jonthan
Mpeta
Vincent Camobreco

1

2

308

Accepted withmodification
Noted

The text has been updated taking into account previous comments.

8922

More information on what remote sensing databases can beaccessed would be useful to provide
The IEA position is that international data could be used as
Roberta Quadrellibenchmark, ideally not as sources. It would be relevant toemphasise that international sources could help identifying nationalsources. Also, the IEA is of course happy to share the data if
needed and also receive feedback in case of inconsistency as theoverall objective is to enhance national and international data
quality through this process.

5854

1

2

318

319

It is unclear to me what this sentence means.

Vincent Camobreco

Accepted

The sentence has been modified.

5810

1

2

319

319

Ann Gallagher

Accepted

Text is modified.

8924

1

2

320

"for QA/QC of international data" spell out Quality Asurance/
Quality Control (QA/QC) for those new to the abreviation.
Should we use "proxy" data instead of "surrogate" data?

Roberta Quadrelli

Rejected

8926

1

2

366

Accepted

3342

1

2

394

394

As from previous comment, section 2.2.2. should also include
Roberta Quadrelli
generation of new data through census and survey (as listed at line
131)
There are aspects of this chapter so far which are repetitive andJustin Bishop
don't provide any additional obvious assistance to a competentperson compiling an emissions inventory

Surrogate data is a term used previously in the 2006 IPCC
Guidelines.
Census and surveys have been noted in section 2.2.2, while they are
discussed in more details in section 2.2.5 and Annex 2A.2.

Accepted

Section has been reorganised taking into account oher comments.

5812

1

2

400

400

Ann Gallagher

Accepted

2148

1

2

401

403

Erik Næsset

Accepted

Cross checked with the 2006 IPCC Guidelines, this should besection 2.2.4. Corrected.
The reference is provided.

3344

1

2

426

426

"provided in Section 2.2.2." is in Section 2.2.2 so seems
redundant.
Should there be a reference to Vol 1, Chap 6.11 which treatsmodels and their relationship to data in a more detailed way?
program' is used here

Justin Bishop

Noted

3346

1

2

444

444

programme' is used here

Justin Bishop

Noted

3348

1

2

452

452

Consider robust statistics, such as median and percentiles, rather
than mean and 95 CI

Justin Bishop

RejectedThank you for sharing the IEA position. No changes were made to
the text.

No action can be taken because comment is out of scope of 2019
Refinement.
No action can be taken because comment is out of scope of 2019
Refinement.
To maintain consistency along the Guidelines.

Comment ID Volume Chapter
6374
1
2

From line To line
453
453

Comment
consider re-arranging these words 'It also is' to' It is also'

Response
Accepted

Authors' note
Proposal accepted and change effected.

Noted

476

it is suggested these words 'However, the methods' be replacedwith 'However, methods'"good practice" in italic. Seems the case everywhere else.

ExpertEmmanuel Jonthan
Mpeta
Emmanuel Jonthan
Mpeta
Kewei Yu

6376

1

2

455

Accepted

No action can be taken because comment is out of scope of 2019
Refinement.
The comment has been addressed in SOD.

4360

1

2

4362

1

2

477

Chapter 5, uppercase. Check all other similar locations.

Kewei Yu

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

6378

1

2

486

486

it is suggested to insert a ';' between documented and this

Noted

508

522

Lines 508-514 and 515-522 appear to be redundant/competing.

Emmanuel Jonthan
Mpeta
Deborah Ottinger

2

509

522

The same sentence is repeated (509 to 510 and in line 515)
Virginia Senaregarding development of emission factors. I suggest to merge thesteps described from line 512 to 514 and from line 516 to 522.

Accepted

No action can be taken because comment is out of scope of 2019
Refinement.
No action can be taken because comment is out of scope of 2019
Refinement.
Texts deleted.

7652

1

2

490

1

1436

1

2

509

514

There is a duplication of information. Delete from end of line 509 Regine Röthlisberger"It is…" to end of line 514 "… processing the data.". All this iscovered in the new text.

Accepted

Texts merged.

8562

1

2

512

514

remove dots at the end of each category

Text merged and re-defined.

5856

1

2

516

516

5814

1

2

516

516

1

2

516

516

4300

1

2

522

522

I suggest that the authors reconsider the word "activity data"
Naofumi Kosaka
because this section discusses emission factors. If this word means
weights to establish weighted-average emission factors, I suggestthat the authors revise so.

Accepted withmodification
Accepted withmodification
Accepted

Text revised.

7098

Suggested rewrite of the sentence: “1. Identify EFs that should be Vincent Camobreco
prioritized for development;”change "Define EFs which" to "Define Emission Factors (EF)Ann Gallagher
which"
remove 'in' from this sentence
Amanda Penistone

Accepted withmodification
Accepted

Word “Activity data” deleted.

3350

1

2

523

528

This repeats what was said earlier

Justin Bishop

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

5816

1

2

523

523

change "for inventory compilers" to "for inventory compilers to"

Ann Gallagher

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

7654

1

2

523

523

"If global default EF is not appropriate" Since this discussion
Deborah Ottinger
focuses on Tier 2 and 3 EF development (presumably following a
key source analysis), recommend deleting this reference to a Tier 1
approach.

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

440

1

2

524

524

copy edit: "acquire data" should read "to acquire data"

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

1438

1

2

524

524

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

7100

1

2

524

524

insert "to" at the beginning of the line: "to" acquire data following Regine Röthlisberger…
insert 'to' before 'acquire'
Amanda Penistone

Accepted

Text revised.

1750

1

2

530

531

Add "see more detailed guidance on factors impacting emission
factors sector-specific guidance chapters"

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

455

Amanullah Dr.

Pauline Midgley

Melissa Weitz

Noted

Text removed.

Text re-written.

Comment ID Volume Chapter
492
1
2

From line To line
532
533

Comment
ExpertTable 2.2. There is not information provided for AFOLU.
Virginia Sena
Information on Agriculture is included but not for FOLU. Is it
possible to provide guidance on sensitive parameters for the FOLU
sector?

Response
Accepted

Authors' note
Table 2.2 updated in collaboration with AFOLU experts.

88

1

2

532

533

The table could be more elaborate. As for example, under
Md. Sirajul Islam
Industrial processes, technology type/efficiency should be a major
EF sensitive parameter too, like CFC free refregerator technology.
Similarly, whether it was possible to use another category as forest
destruction for firewood/other use and net increase in co2 emission
under Agriculture, Forestry and Land use. Again, as per section
1.1 of chapter 1, there should be another category as other (e.g.,indirect emissions from nitrogen deposition from non-agriculturesources, etc), which is absent here.

Accepted withmodification

The table and parameters have been updated.

1440

1

2

532

533

What is meant by "Life of product" in category "Solid Waste", last Regine Röthlisberger
bullet?

Accepted withmodification

Text has been revised.

1752

1

2

532

533

For oil and gas, include extent of lower-emitting measures used, by Melissa Weitz
segment. For manure management, include types of management
systems.

Accepted withmodification

Text revised.

2036

1

2

532

532

In table 2.2. The list of main variables for agriculture looks quite Sandro Federici
incomplete and mixed up (e.g. the type of management systems isrelevant for the livestock subsector) and N-fixing crops are notanymore a specific sub-category of N2O emissions from maangedsoils.
Further, why have sensitive parameters for lulucf not been listed?

Accepted withmodification

The table and parameters have been updated.

5858

1

2

532

533

The information in Table 2.2 is very detailed for a Volume
Vincent Camobreco
discussing general guidance and reporting issues, and may be bestleft to the “Choice of emission factors” sections of thesectoral/source-level guidance where a more comprehensive
assessment associated with the actual method could be provided.

Accepted withmodification

Table has been revised.

Comment ID Volume Chapter
7656
1
2

From line To line
532
532

Comment
ExpertIn Table 2.2, the list of EF sensitive parameters for Industrial
Deborah Ottinger
Processes is incomplete, given the wide array of parameters that
can affect emissions in this sector. At the top of the list,
recommend inserting "See Volume 3 for process-specific sensitive
parameters. These may include, for example: [follow with current
bullets as well as the following:] composition of raw materials(e.g., carbon contents), emission reductions technologies and theirefficiencies, GHG by-product generation rates, and the frequency
and duration of process disturbances (e.g., anode effects inaluminium production)."Response
Accepted withmodification

Authors' note
The table and parameters have been updated.

2402

1

2

532

Table 2.2

It is recommended to revise the IPCC methodologies to list CO2 Fiji George
from combustion along natural gas systems under the natural gas
system sector (IPCC Source Category
1B2b) and similarly for Petroleum Systems. This is highly
important as one evaluates the impacts of fuel choices for policies
and assess the entire lifecycle assessment. The current system iscumbersome and does not portray the sectoral impact for policy
assessment.

Rejected

The IPCC methodological guidance makes distinction between
combustion and fugitive emissions.

3352

1

2

537

545

Likewise, this repeats the options set out in lines 523-8 above

Justin Bishop

5818

1

2

560

560

change "focussing" to "focusing"

Ann Gallagher

Accepted withmodification
Accepted

As suggested, Lines 537-545 revised so to avoid the repetitions in
Lines 523-528.
Typo corrected.

4856

1

2

593

593

mining' should be changed to a more generic word such as 'finding' Elsa Hatanaka
to be more user friendly. (editorial)

Accepted

Text revised.

5820

1

2

593

594

Suggested: "Additionally, developing countries should focus
mining of existing emissions data from the regional research
centres conducting GHGs measurements to derive emission
factors"

Ann Gallagher

Accepted

Text revised as suggested.

1442

1

2

594

594

eliminate (s): who conduct(s) GHGs measurements…

Regine Röthlisberger

Accepted

Text revised.

7102

1

2

594

594

replace 'conducts' with 'conduct'

Amanda Penistone

Accepted

Text revised.

1754

1

2

595

596

Maybe include "in addition to use of the EFDB to find new EF for Melissa Weitz
use by inventory compilers, inventory compilers should also
consider populating the EFDB with their country-specificdata sothat other countries with similar circumstances may consider it for
use in the GHGI or for assessment of their own EF.

Accepted

Revised adding suggested text.

Comment ID Volume Chapter
8928
1
2

From line To line
644

Comment
ExpertAs from previous comment, it would be beneficial to state upfront Roberta Quadrelli
the need to map all relevant data collection performed nationally(e.g. energy statistics); and to link to the relevant stakeholder incharge of tracking energy policies (e.g. Ministry of Energy; NSO;
etc). Effort could be made also to understand whether any multiple
purpose could be addressed by a data colelction (e.g. for enegry
policy tracking and for inventory compilation).

Response
Noted

Authors' note
It is already in the text lines 274-284. no changes were made to the
text.

10148

1

2

647

Rejected

With sources with small population it is quite feasible to make acensus.

8930

1

2

656

remove Cenus I don't think for Invenories couuntries can do
Wafa Aboul Hosn
censuses The Population and Economic Censues can be used fordata sources and for estimating
Should refer to institutions in charge of tracking enegry policies as Roberta Quadrelli
well (e.g. Energy Ministries)

Accepted

Text is revised.

8564

1

2

662

Information (capital I) for uniformity with previous sections

Accepted

Corrected.

746

1

2

677

681

In Box 2.2 please consider in a part describing census, that these Lenka Zetochová
are irregular and have limited scale.
In the most cases, census is performed in a longer time frame andyears between are missing

Accepted withmodification

Text in the Box 2.2 is revised.

3354

1

2

683

684

The role of national statistics authorities has been explained in
mutliple locations, both here and in Vol 1.

Justin Bishop

Accepted

Text has been revised.

5822

1

2

683

683

Suggested: "In some countries the NSA is a single agency
responsible"

Ann Gallagher

Noted

4364

1

2

695

Survey - letter case? This word in other places?

Kewei Yu

Accepted

The role of national statistics is very important issue so it ismentioned several times. A check was done to the text to avoid
repetition.
Text is revised.

494

1

2

759

759

I suggest to delete the reference to developing countries in the
Virginia Senasentence: "Data reporting requirements pose a challenge todeveloping countries and require effective data management
practices". It will be better to say: "Data reporting require effective
data management practices".

Accepted withmodification

Text is revised combining different comments related to thissentence.

7910

1

2

759

760

The first sentence seems to read to directed to developing
Raul Salas Reyes
countries, while this may be true, there may be developed
countries that also have this challenge. I would suggest to rephrase
to the following: "Data reporting requirements may present achallenge and require effective data managment practices."

Accepted withmodification

Text is revised combining different comments related to thissentence.

46

1

2

760

760

It is suggested that "Standard software tools should be used fordata management." be revised to "Standard software tools areencouraged to be used for data management".

Mingshan Su

Accepted

Text revised.

7912

1

2

760

760

I would also suggest to clarify what data management practices
are.

Raul Salas Reyes

Accepted withmodification

The term "data management practice" has been removed from SOD
text. Only the term "management practices" was kept in relation toagricultural activities.

Amanullah Dr.

Comment ID Volume Chapter
10004
1
2

From line To line
763
1025

Comment
ExpertNeeds to better address or reference consideration of time-series
Mausami Desaiconsistency in addition to completeness - and refer to Ch.5. Thisis an important consideration and also consideration of changes tothe sector/category overtime in updating the time series withintegration of this data.

Response
Accepted

Authors' note
Linkage to chapter 5 of volume 1 was made.

10108

1

2

763

763

This is a much needed addition to the Guidelines! It will be helpful Neelam Singhto include some illustrative examples for some GHG reporting
programs highlighting a subcategory or category that's being
captured through data from the GHG reporting program or how thereporting program has been designed to collect data in a form thatis useful for the national inventory (e.g., Australia program).

Accepted

Text referring compilers to other resources of information when
considering use of facility data has been added in Box 2.3.

7048

1

2

763

1025

This section is very important, but should be moved as a new
section under 2.2 collecting data

Vitor Gois Ferreira

Rejected

8566

1

2

764

no need of this line

Amanullah Dr.

Accepted

This section focuses specifically on facility reported information
along with its use in national inventories and not just datacollection.
The comment has been addressed in SOD.

7572

1

2

766

766

Suggest deleting "The increasing availability of," and revisingsentence to begin "Detailed industrial facility data, increasingly
collected for various goals. . ."Deborah Ottinger

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

10110

1

2

766

769

Rephrase as shown in single quotation marks: 'Detailed' industrial Neelam Singhfacility data…utilized in national inventories. 'It is becoming
increasingly available and' when implemented appropriately, thisfacility specific data may be used to replace 'top-down' activity
data and global emission factors....[reason for suggesting replacing
aggregated with top-down - Facility specific data will also need tobe aggregated to the subsector/sector level but it's bottom-up]

Accepted withmodification

Modification of text was considered in SOD to put emphasis on
multiple uses of facility-level data by inventory compilers.

444

1

2

768

768

copy edit: here and in several other instances in this chapter,"facility specific" should be hyphenated as it is used adjectivally"facility-specific"; also check and hyphenate "plant specific"

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

Pauline Midgley

Comment ID Volume Chapter
10112
1
2

From line To line
768
769

Comment
Expert
The facility data may also be used to validate national inventory
Neelam Singhestimates, which in turn improves quality. For example, the US
EPA used source level data collected through its mandatory
Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program (GHGRP) to evaluate
estimates for emissions from the natural gas sector for the 2013
national inventory report (US EPA, 2013). These included
estimates for methane emissions from liquids unloading - theprocess of removing liquids in wet gas wells - and fromhydraulically fractured well completions and workovers. The US
EPA updated the estimates as the cross-check against GHGRP
data supported the direction of the changes. It had proposed using
GHGRP data on well completions and workovers with hydraulicfracturing to develop emissions factors for the 2014 national
inventory report. See - Overview of Updates to the Natural Gas
Sector Emissions Calculations for the Inventory of US Greenhouse
Gas Emissions and Sinks 1990–2011- Uploaded here and alsoavailable online athttps://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/201512/documents/fact-sheet-oil-and-gas-estimates-in-2013inventory.pdf

Response
Accepted

Authors' note
The comment has been addressed in SOD.

7574

1

2

769

770

Recommend adding a paragraph that lists some of the potential
Deborah Ottinger
benefits of using facility-specific data, e.g., "Facillity-specific data
can increase the precision and accuracy of inventory estimates by
providing inputs to emissions calculations at the facility or processlevel. These may include facility- or process-specific emission
factors, fuel or feedstock carbon contents, GHG consumption (e.g.,
the quantities of F-GHGs used in etching vs. chamber cleaning insemiconductor manufacturing), abatement efficiencies (accounting
for both the destruction and removal efficiency of the technology
and the uptime of the installed device), and operating parameters(e.g., the frequency and duration of anode effects in primaryaluminium production).

Accepted withmodification

Concepts added in other sections.

6212

1

2

770

771

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

7104

1

2

770

770

To better reflect meaning of sentence, change "...different from the Frank Neitzert
inventory compilation." to "…different than for inventory
compilation"
remove 'the' from in front of 'inventory'
Amanda Penistone

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

10114

1

2

771

773

Rephrase as shown in single quotation marks: Data may becollected for air quality monitoring programs, 'emissions trading
program,' 'compliance' with Directives or legislation on different
aspects related to air pollution', and thus' in some cases data 'may'need to be "adjusted" for inventory use.

Neelam Singh

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

4366

1

2

772

Directives - letter case?

Kewei Yu

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

Comment ID Volume Chapter
5824
1
2

From line To line
772
772

Comment
Does Directives need a capital D?

ExpertAnn Gallagher

Response
Accepted

Authors' note
The comment has been addressed in SOD.

6214

1

2

773

774

This new section, '2.3 Use of Facility Data in Inventories' is timely Frank Neitzert
and useful. It is focussed on methods for designing GHG
reporting systems to appropriately take into account their use for
GHG Inventories. This is very worthwhile, however only at theend is there any discussion on GHG systems not designed forInventory use. It is suggested that additional text be added near the
beginning of 2.3 describing how facility data designed primarily
for other purposes might be utilized. This discussion (possibly atext box?) could be placed after the Introduction (i.e after line
773).

Accepted

Modification added to the intruction section.

10118

1

2

774

774

Rephrase as shown in single quotation marks: Designing'greenhouse gas reporting programs' for inventory use

Neelam Singh

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

10116

1

2

774

774

It will be helpful to include some illustrative examples for how the Neelam Singhreporting program has been designed to collect data in a form thatis useful for the national inventory (e.g., Australia program).

Accepted

Text referring compilers to other resources of information when
considering use of facility data has been added in Box 2.3.

7576

1

2

775

775

Replace "regulated" with "regulatory"

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

10120

1

2

775

775

Rephrase as shown in single quotation marks: This section
Neelam Singh
presents approaches for the direct integration of facility 'data' from
regulated greenhouse gas……..

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

496

1

2

780

781

1

2

780

780

Accepted withmodification
Accepted

The sentence has been presented in bold and italic.

10122

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

7578

1

2

782

782

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

7580

1

2

783

783

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

7582

1

2

783

783

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

442

1

2

783

783

Is it a subtitle? It seem to be a regular sentence in the text, but it is Virginia Senain bold.
Rephrase as shown in single quotation marks: Integrating facility Neelam Singhemissions 'data' into an inventory should only be considered
Recommend adding "of the reporting program" to the end of this Deborah Ottinger
sentence after "design."
Recommend adding "monitoring and caculation" between
Deborah Ottinger"specified" and "methods"
What is meant by "reporting criteria?" The criteria that determine Deborah Ottinger
who reports, e.g., thresholds?
copy edit: here and in numerous other instances in this chapter,
Pauline Midgley"facility reported" should be hyphenated as it is used adjectivally"facility-reported"

Accepted withmodification

Text has been revised.

Deborah Ottinger

Comment ID Volume Chapter
7584
1
2

From line To line
786
786

Comment
ExpertIn general, section 2.3 would be enhanced by the addition of more Deborah Ottinger
guidance on how to maintain time series consistency as themethods and/or data used for estimating facility-specific emissionschange over time. (This is an issue that the U.S. has faced inseveral different areas in both voluntary and mandatory GHG
reporting programs.) One way to ensure time series consistency
under these circumstances is to require that all the calculation input
data be reported to the Inventory compiler. In that case, theinventory compiler can estimate emissions using both the old andnew methods for one or more years and use splicing to achieve
time series consistency. If some input data is NOT reported to theinventory compiler, then the reporting facility can be requested or
required to provide estimates using both methods for one or more
years. The inventory compiler can then perform the splicing. To
address this issue here, recommend adding the following after"intended" and before "Elements to consider": "Incorporating
provisions to allow splicing of data in the event of methodologicalchanges will help ensure that time series consistency ismaintained."

Response
Accepted

Authors' note
Text revised and concepts included.

1444

1

2

787

787

1

2

787

787

Accepted withmodification
Accepted withmodification

Section 2.3.3 has been updated to Section 2.3.2.1.

6006

7586

1

2

787

787

Reference to Section 2.3.2.1: There is no such section? Reference Regine Röthlisberger
should be made to Section 2.3.3"Section 2.3.2.1" refered to in this line; not clear where this section Ana Blondel
can be found.
Maybe, it should be "Section 2.3.3" instead?
"Section 2.3.2.1" should be "Section 2.3.3"
Deborah Ottinger

Numbering of sections has been revised.

6216

1

2

792

792

Accepted withmodification
Accepted

10124

1

2

792

792

1756

1

2

793

799

For the most part, inventory compilers are unlikely to be
Melissa Weitz
developing the reporting system. The language should be updated
to note that and to encourage inventory compilers to work withgroups developing reporting systems so that data can be useful for
the GHG inventory. The guidance should note that reporters tosuch programs may support use of their data in the GHG inventory
so that it reflects the information they have put resources intocollecting.

5826

1

2

795

795

Suggested: "of high-quality, industrial, facility-reported data" orintroduce FRD to indicate 'facility reported data'.

7588

1

2

795

795

Insert period after "data" and replace "and to" with "It."This subsection '2.3.3 Facility Specific Data' is really aFrank Neitzert
subheading under 2.3.2 Designing for Inventory Use. Therefore,suggest the title be changed to '2.3.2.1 Facility Specific Data'.
Is this section 2.3.3 or 2.3.2.1 as referred to on line 787
Neelam Singh

The number of sections have been checked and modified
appropriately.

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

Accepted withmodification
Accepted withmodification

Subsections have been checked.

Ann Gallagher

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

Deborah Ottinger

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

Content included in the first paragraph of section 2.3.2.

Comment ID Volume Chapter
1450
1
2

From line To line
796
799

Comment
ExpertThe sentence starting at the ned of line 796 should be reworded,
Regine Röthlisberger
e.g.: When there is a need to incorporate facility-specific data into
the national inventory, the agencies responsible for the national
inventory and the relevant agency for the facility-specific reporting
should collaborate in order to reduce industrial reporting burden.

Response
Accepted withmodification

Authors' note
Text has been revised.

446

1

2

797

797

Pauline Midgley

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

5828

1

2

797

797

copy edit: subject/verb agreements: "collaboration between
agencies is needed when greenhouse gas emissions are reported"
Change to: "greenhouse gas emissions are"

Ann Gallagher

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

10126

1

2

797

797

Neelam Singh

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

1758

1

2

801

814

Melissa Weitz

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

5830

1

2

801

801

Rephrase as shown in single quotation marks: ...collaboration
between agencies 'is' needed when greenhouse gas emissions 'are'reported….
This section should also include information on extent of controls
and lower-emitting technologies.
Consider using 'FRD' to indicate facility reported data

Ann Gallagher

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

1452

1

2

801

802

The sentence should be reworded, e.g.: Even with independent
third party verification of facility reported emissions, the use of
these data in a national inventory may not be possible due toinsufficient information or a lack of transparency, preventing acomprehensive quality assessment of the data.

Regine Röthlisberger

Accepted withmodification

Text has been revised.

7590

1

2

802

802

Replace "can lead to an inability to support" and rest of sentencewith "may prevent inventory compilers from assessing reported
data for potential use."

Deborah Ottinger

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

7592

1

2

807

807

For clarity, recommend replacing sentence beginning with "facility Deborah Ottinger
reported activity data" with "Compilers must be able to understandor estimate the fraction of national activity accounted for byreporting facilities."

Accepted withmodification

Text revised.

10128

1

2

807

810

Even when the entire sector is not covered, the data can be used if Neelam Singha reliable estimate can be obtained for the missing facilities. Thisis conveyed later in lines 849-852 but would be helpful to at least
note it here as well. Australia is an example where somethingsimilar has been done for coal mines.

Noted

This statement is intended to be a general statement as to be
inclusive of all possibilities. No change has been made to the text.

6010

1

2

815

815

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

6012

1

2

815

815

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

7594

1

2

815

816

Table 2.5: should say "Activity data, emission estimates are clearly Ana Blondel
explained and documented" instead of "Activity data, emission
estimates transparent"
Table 2.5: should say "Emission factors are clearly explained and Ana Blondel
documented"
instead of "Emission factors are transparent"
In Table 2.5, in "Comparability" row, recommend inserting a new Deborah Ottinger
bullet "Facilities in same industry use similar methods."

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

Comment ID Volume Chapter
1760
1
2

From line To line
815
815

Comment
ExpertProvide more guidance on "time series demonstrates consistency" Melissa Weitz
What actions can be taken to ensure that the time series will beconsistent?
Table 2.5: should say "Methodology applied is clearly explained
Ana Blondel
and documented"
instead of "Methodology applied is transparent"
In Table 2.5, in "Consistency" row, after Time series demonstrates Deborah Ottinger
consistency," recommend adding "or if not, provision is made forachieving such consistency."
In Table 2.5, in "Accuracy" row, after "Primary emission factors Deborah Ottinger
are accurately determined," recommend adding "perhaps based onstandardized measurement methods."
In Table 2.5, in "Completeness" row, recommend replacing
Deborah Ottinger"facilities" with "emissions" in fourth line. It is the fraction ofemissions, not facilities, covered that determines the completenessof the reported emissions. In many cases, a high percentage ofemissions can be covered even if a relatively low percentage offacilities is covered (the "80/20 rule").

Response
Accepted withmodification

Authors' note
Reference to chapter 5 for clarity and examples has been included.

6008

1

2

815

815

Accepted withmodification

Text has been revised.

7596

1

2

815

816

Accepted withmodification

Text revised.

7598

1

2

815

816

Accepted withmodification

Text revised.

7602

1

2

815

816

Accepted withmodification

This statement is intended to be inclusive of all reported data
(emission factors, fuel quantities, etc.) by facilities, not justemissions. Modification based on comment to enhancecontext/clarity.

7600

1

2

815

816

In Table 2.5, in "Transparency" row, the statement appears
Deborah Ottinger"Activity data, emissions estimates transparent." Because activity
data, such as production quantity, is often CBI, recommend
qualifying this with "at least to the inventory compiler or verifier ofthe facility-specific data."

Rejected

The comment was considered. However, it is expected that relevant
data is reported with the understanding that confidentiality is
maintained and available only to those with access. No change wasmade in the text of the SOD.

6218

1

2

816

816

Accepted withmodification

Subheading checked.

2

822

822

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

2

823

823

Suggest that another (unnumbered) subtitle be inserted here to
Frank Neitzert
introduce the text following line 816. Title could be "Quality
Attainment Through Presrcibed Methodologies and Reporting
Elements".
Recommend adding "feedstock, and/or production" between "fuel" Deborah Ottinger
and "quantities." Precision for feedstocks and/or production canhave a direct impact on the precision of emissions estimates.
After "fuels and feedstock;" recommend adding "standardized
Deborah Ottinger
methods of measuring emissions of GHGs from vents andcorrelating these with activity data measurements to establish
emission factors."

7604

1

7606

1

Rejected

The intent of the text in this para is a focus on activity data and noton emissions. No changes have been implemented in the text.

Comment ID Volume Chapter
7608
1
2

From line To line
833
834

Comment
Expert
The purpose and organization of Table 2.6 are not clear. The
Deborah Ottinger
bullets under "Methodological Requirements" are sometimes
recommendations and sometimes only items. For example,"Specify measurement and sampling methods" appears in the third
row while "Source specific methods" appears in the fifth. The
distinction between these two bullets is not clear, nor is the reason
why they appear in different rows of the table. Recommend
organizing the table as follows: (1) Identity of covered industries:[include contents of the sixth row of the table starting "Specify
industrial categories"]; (2) Monitoring equipment specifications:[include requirements for flowmeter or scale precision andaccuracy, calibration requirements and associated standards]; (3)Monitoring Methods: [include monitoring methods for contents offuels, process feedstocks, vented emissions]; (4) Calculation
Methods: [include guidance relevant to these]; (5) Time Series
Consistency: [include guidance on how to maintain time seriesconsistency when the methods or data used by reporting facilities
change]. Under "Reporting Elements," for Calculation Methods,
include "inputs to equations, including activity data, destruction
and removal efficiency and abatement device uptime, processparameters, [etc.]" Note that for some of these categories, forexample, monitoring equipment, calibration records, etc. may notneed to be reported, but they should be kept as records.

Response
Accepted withmodification

Authors' note
Table revised and concepts included.

7610

1

2

833

In Table 2.5, the last row reads "Set reporting de minimis not
Deborah Ottinger
larger than the uncertainty for each source type." This may not be
an appropriate criterion for defining "de minimis." The uncertainty
of a source category is often driven by imprecision, not inaccuracy,
but leaving out a source will result in a systematic underestimate,albeit in some cases a small one.

Accepted withmodification

Table revised.

374

1

2

834

Majority of Bureau of statistics are not taking statistics on
activities that have direct relationship to the economy e.g.
polupation, comodity production, imprts and exports. Probably
there will be a need to provide guidance on how these bureau of
statistics counld be brought on board and the kind of capacity
building that may be needed

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

6220

1

2

834

834

A) Subheading is numbered incorrectly. B) Suggest this beFrank Neitzert
changed to a (numberless) subtitle with the same text - ie. subtitle
under 2.3.2.1 called "Collaboration with National Statistics Data
Agencies".

Accepted withmodification

Subheading checked.

10130

1

2

834

834

Is this section 2.1.1.1 or something starting with 2.3?

Accepted withmodification

Subsections have been checked.

834

Jamidu Katima

Neelam SinghComment ID Volume Chapter
47
1
2

From line To line
834
834

Comment
Please check the title number "2.1.1.1"

ExpertMingshan Su

Response
Accepted

Authors' note
The comment has been addressed in SOD.

498

1

2

834

835

Virginia Sena

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

1446

1

2

834

834

Regine Röthlisberger

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

6014

1

2

834

992

Ana Blondel

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

4368

1

2

840

846

The numbers 2.1.1.1 from the subtitle "Collaboration with
National…." is not correct, since it is under section 2.3.3.
Numbering of section 2.1.1.1 is flawed. This section is underheading 2.3.3 Facility specific data, so it should start with 2.3.3.
Problem with numbering of sections/subsections, e.g. "2.1.1.1" inline 834 should be "2.3.3.1"
Grenhouse gas, GHG, define first and use

Kewei Yu

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

352

1

2

840

840

After the sentence "The national datasets provide complete
Domenico Gaudioso
coverage of a given sector, category or subcategory", insert thefollowing text "although the coverage of the information which is
directly collected from the installations may be limited, whichmeans that appropriate methods to achieve full coverage have beenused by the statistical agency. A possible problem with the use of
the information provided by statistical agencies lies in theprotection of confidentiality, which may restrict access or reportingof data from individual plants."

Accepted withmodification

Confidentiality concerns and access have been discussed in section
2.3.3.1.

5832

1

2

854

854

change to: "over- or underreporting"

Ann Gallagher

Sentence reviewed.

8932

1

2

857

This para is very important and its content could be made much
more prominent in the chapter. A working group could include
experts from NSOs, inventory compilers, and relevant ministries.

Roberta Quadrelli

Accepted withmodification
Accepted withmodification

7106

1

2

860

860

remove 'the'Amanda Penistone

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

7914

1

2

868

868

The first sentence seem to indicate that national agencies should
not use/collect data from GHG reporting programmes. It is notclear why this is suggested or if this was the intention of thisparagraph. I would suggest to rephrase it for it to be clearer. I
would suggest the following : "Statistical agencies should review
the information available from facilities and GHG reporting
programmes to identify possible overlaps; doing so will assist in
gaining efficiencies and reducing costs."

Raul Salas Reyes

Accepted withmodification

Text has been revised to improve in clarity.

7612

1

2

874

877

Good advice.

Deborah Ottinger

Noted

No action is needed.

4370

1

2

876

greenhouse gas should be GHG

Kewei Yu

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

500

1

2

878

878

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

1448

1

2

878

878

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

6222

1

2

878

878

Accepted withmodification

Subheading checked.

The numbers 2.1.2. from the subtitle "Integration Approaches…" Virginia Senais not correct, since it is under section 2.3.3.
Numbering of section 2.1.2 is flawed. This section is following
Regine Röthlisberger
heading 2.3.3.
A) Subheading is numbered incorrectly - number should be 2.3.3. Frank NeitzertB) Suggest the title be changed as well, to better reflect contents.
Change to: " 2.3.3 Apporaches for Use of Collected Facility
Data".

The text has been modified to enhance clarity.

Comment ID Volume Chapter
6224
1
2

From line To line
878
879

Comment
ExpertSuggest the addition of a sub-subheading here to clarify focus of Frank Neitzert
the text: "2.3.3.1 Integration of Facility Data Designed forInventory Application"
Overall, section 2.1.2 is helpful. However, it would be enhanced Deborah Ottinger
by adding guidance regarding the fact that the population of nonreporting facilities may systematically differ from the population ofreporting facilities (e.g., in their emission factors or othercharacteristics), and that compilers should account for thispossibility. Guidance regarding this situation and how to address it(e.g., with stratification of reporting facilities into different groups)
is available in the TFI Techical Bulletin 1, Use of Facility-SpecificData in National Greenhouse Gas Inventories, in the first columnof page 4 and the first column of page 5 (under "Sample Size").

Response
Accepted withmodification

Authors' note
Subheading checked.

7622

1

2

878

992

Accepted withmodification

Text has been modified taking into account the comments.

10132

1

2

878

878

Check section number - 2.1.2 or something starting with 2.3?

Neelam Singh

Subsections have been checked.

878

878

Please check the title number "2.1.2"

Mingshan Su

Accepted withmodification
Accepted

48

1

2

10156

1

2

878

992

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

1

2

879

992

Is a good section. However, I do not see how this translates to
Malini Nairdeveloping countires such as India
The paragraph provides useful suggestions about how to integrate Domenico Gaudioso
facility data, but it looks very theoretical; it would be advisable toshorten it and to provide concrete examples, such as how to deal
with incomplete data sets due to the use of thresholds (e.g. PRTR,
ETS)".

354

Accepted withmodification

Paragraph has been modified and clear guidance in suchcircumstances provided.

7614

1

2

882

882

Not entirely clear what "inventory variables" means. Does it mean Deborah Ottinger"inputs into emissions calculations, e.g., emission factors?" If so,suggest replacing with this text.

Accepted withmodification

Text clarified.

7616

1

2

883

883

Replace "singularly" with "separately."

Deborah Ottinger

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

1762

1

2

889

889

Could add "improve trend information by providing additional
detail on changes in technologies over time" e.g. controls,
equipment types, etc.

Melissa Weitz

Noted

Facility-reported data (if yearly) should reflect operation changes
including technology or process change, fuel switching, production
shut down, etc. No change has been made.

5834

1

2

890

890

change to: "will be in"

Ann Gallagher

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

6226

1

2

892

894

Suggest new title for equation 2.1 (to clarify description):Frank Neitzert"Emissions Reported By a Facility (For All Emission Categories)"

Accepted withmodification

Title has been changed.

6228

1

2

892

894

Frank Neitzert

1

2

892

894

49

1

2

894

894

Mingshan Su

Accepted withmodification
Accepted withmodification
Accepted

Description of parameters has changed.

6230

Suggest change to equation 2.1: use variable E_fac insteand of
E_F to correspond to eq 2.3
Suggest change to equation 2.1 to account for all combustion
emission categories.
Eotheri should be Eotherl

7618

1

2

894

894

The notation n1, n2, etc., is somewhat unusual.

Deborah Ottinger

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

Frank Neitzert

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

Change effected as proposed.
The comment has been addressed in SOD.

Comment ID Volume Chapter
6232
1
2

From line To line
895
901

Comment
ExpertSuggest changes to some of the variable descriptions in equation Frank Neitzert
2.1 to a) clarify meanings and b) to correspond with text and withequation 2.2

Response
Accepted withmodification

Authors' note
Description of parameters has changed.

5836

1

2

899

899

" industrial process emissions process k in the facility (with a total Ann Gallagherof n3 processes);" could benefit from a slight tweek. Suggested:"industrial process emissions K in the facility (with a total of n3
processes);"

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

7620

1

2

912

913

Final sentence is unclear. An example would be helpful.

Deborah Ottinger

The sentence was made clear.

6234

1

2

929

931

Suggest new title for equation 2.2 (to clarify description):"Emissions Calculated By a Facility-Specific Emission Factors"

Frank Neitzert

Accepted withmodification
Accepted withmodification

6236

1

2

929

931

Suggest change to equation 2.2: use variable E_IC_S insteand of
E_IC to clarify that it relates to an IPCC subsector

Frank Neitzert

Accepted withmodification

Description of parameters has changed.

6238

1

2

933

939

Suggest some changes to variable descriptions in equation 2.2: a)remove 'subcategory', retaining only 'category (to align with text
and equations) b) clarify desription in lines 935-936

Frank Neitzert

Accepted withmodification

Text has been modified.

5838

1

2

935

935

change: "emission total for a specific" to "emissions total for a
specific" or "total emissions for a specific"

Ann Gallagher

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

6240

1

2

940

941

For consistent meaning, suggest changing "…for an industrial
reporting category can be computed by summing the totals foreach of the emission categories." to "…for an industrial
classification can be computed by summing the totals for each of
the subsectors"

Frank Neitzert

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

6248

1

2

943

943

Change "The General Facility Emisssions Integration equation…." Frank Neitzert
to "The Total Facility Emissions equation…" (to correspond withnew eqaution 2.3 title suggested for line 955).

Accepted withmodification

Text revised.

6242

1

2

955

955

Frank Neitzert

1

2

956

968

Accepted withmodification
Accepted

Title has been changed.

50

Suggest new title for equation 2.3 (to clarify description): "Total
Facility Emissions"
Please define n1 and n2

6244

1

2

956

956

Frank Neitzert

6246

1

2

957

968

Suggest change to equation 2.3: use variable E_IC_S insteand of
E_IC to align with equation 2.2
Suggest some changes to variable descriptions in equation 2.3: a)remove 'subcategory', retaining only 'category (to align with text
and equations) b) clarify desription in lines 960-961

6250

1

2

970

971

For consistent meaning, suggest changing "…for each of theemission categories and subcatories." to "…for each of thesubsectors."

Frank Neitzert

Mingshan Su

Frank Neitzert

Title has been changed.

Context included.

Accepted withmodification
Accepted withmodification

Description of parameters has changed.

Accepted withmodification

Text revised.

Description of parameters has changed.

Comment ID Volume Chapter
6252
1
2

From line To line
974
974

Comment
ExpertChange "The General Facility Emisssions Integration equation…." Frank Neitzert
to "The Total Facility Emissions equation…" (to correspond withnew eqaution 2.3 title suggested for line 955).

Response
Accepted

Authors' note
The comment has been addressed in SOD.

6254

1

2

979

979

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

6258

1

2

986

986

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

6256

1

2

986

986

To clarify, change "…and this should be for transparency…" to " Frank Neitzert…and this should be the case for transparency…"
To clarify, change "…updated emission factors…" to "…updated Frank Neitzert
inventory emission factors…"
To clarify, suggest adding a new sentence: "Over time, a GHG
Frank Neitzert
reporting system may collect substantial emission factor
information." This should be inserted before sentencecommencing with "Depending on the approach…."

Accepted withmodification

Text revised.

6260

1

2

988

989

To remove repetition and add clarity, suggest changing "WhenFrank Neitzert
there is a break in time series consistency and it is justifiable, suchas but not limited to the…" to "When there is a break and it isjustifiable, such as for the…"

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

6264

1

2

991

992

To clarify, suggest changing "…facility reported data including a Frank Neitzert
discussion on time series consistency" to "…facility reported data,
including a discussion on time series consistency, in theinventory."

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

6262

1

2

991

991

To clarify, change "…documentation of the explanation isrequired." to "…an explantion with documentation is required."Frank Neitzert

Accepted withmodification

Modified sentence.

6266

1

2

992

992

Regarding time series consitency, suggest making reference to
IPCC Guidelines V1, Ch 5 .

Frank Neitzert

Accepted

Reference added.

6268

1

2

993

993

Suggest changing subheading to sub-subheading, as theFrank Neitzert
subsequent text fits under 2.3.3 (see line 834). Also suggest
changing the wording. I.e : change "2.3.4 Other Integration
Approaches of Facility Data" to "2.3.3.2 Uses of Facility Data not
Originally Designed for Inventory Application".

Accepted withmodification

Subheading and title have been checked and revised taking into
account the suggested text.

448

1

2

994

994

Pauline Midgley

Accepted

Editorial.

1764

1

2

994

1003

presumably "More already explained" should be "As alreadyexplained"
These paragraphs have already been covered, above.

Melissa Weitz

Accepted

Text has been checked.

6270

1

2

994

1024

This is generally good material, but may need to be fleshed out a Frank Neitzert
bit. As suggested before (under line 773), some information on
the use of facility data not designed for inventory application
should be provided near the beginning of 2.3, likely after 2.3.1. It's
recommended that the text for 2.3.3.2 be reconsidered only after
text for the earlier discussion has been completed.

Accepted

Text expanded.

7108

1

2

994

996

this paragraph needs proof-reading

Noted

The paragraph was checked for editing.

450

1

2

995

996

sentence incomplete: e.g. "an accurate examination of the purpose Pauline Midgley
and information collected is made"Accepted

The verb has been added.

Amanda PenistoneComment ID Volume Chapter
7788
1
2

From line To line
1005
1005

Comment
Modify a phrase “at plant level” to “at the facility level”.

ExpertNataliya Stranadko

Response
Accepted

Authors' note
The comment has been addressed in SOD.

452

1

2

1011

1016

these two sentences seem to be duplicates; surely only one isneeded?

Pauline Midgley

Accepted withmodification

Text has been revised to check for duplication, however it is notclear to which sentences the reviewer is referring to.

7624

1

2

1025

1025

Recommend adding a section on ensuring time series consistency. Deborah Ottinger
This should include discussions of (1) integrating facility-specificestimates with older estimates based on national datasets and (2)managing changes in the facility-specific reporting itself. There issome discussion of the former issue in the TFI Technical Bulletin
1, Use of Facility-Specific Data in National Greenhouse Gas
Inventories. The latter issue could be addressed with a brief
paragraph something like "The methods and data that facilities use
to estimate their emissions are likely to improve over time. Given
this situation, it is important for inventory compilers to maintaintime series consistency despite these changes. One way to ensure
time series consistency under these circumstances is to require that
all the calculation input data be reported under the reporting
program. In that case, the inventory compiler can estimate
emissions using both the old and new methods for one or more
years and use splicing to achieve time series consistency. (SeeVolume 1, Chapter 5 of the 2006 IPCC Guidellines for guidanceon how to splice data sets.) If some input data is NOT reported tothe program, then the reporting facility can be requested or
required to provide estimates using both methods for one or more
years. The inventory compiler can then perform the splicing.

Accepted

Text on how to ensure time series consistency has been expanded
and content from the cited document considered.

6272

1

2

1025

1025

Could a new subheading, say "2.3.4 Other Considerations" beadded here? Here some text could be included on QA/QC and
Uncertainty. These are important activities related to facility data
as well. Ideas could be drawn from TFI Technical Bulletin 1.

Frank Neitzert

Accepted withmodification

Text has been expanded. Reference to QA/QC activities added also
considering the cited reference.

6274

1

2

1025

1025

Also under the new subheading "Other Considerations" could be Frank Neitzert
included some text on documentation related to facility data.
Suggest referring to IPCC report on the Expert Meeting on Use ofModels and Facility-Level Data…. (held in 2010).

Accepted withmodification

Text on documentation added. Content and reference to the report
included.

8568

1

2

1026

1060

profer format for all refernces

Amanullah Dr.

Accepted

References have been presented in the same format.

4372

1

2

1100

1101

double counting or double-counting, be consistent.

Kewei Yu

Accepted

Editorial, check for consistency.

Comment ID Volume Chapter
8934
1
2

From line To line
1101

Comment
ExpertWe should not recommend inventory compilers to develop energy Roberta Quadrellibalances, if energy balances are developed already within otherinstitutions for other purposes. The emphasis shold be to work
together with the relevant experts to understand how to optimise
national work.

Response
Noted

Authors' note
Ok with the concept but could not find the line the comment is
supposed to refer to. No change has been made in the text.

8936

1

2

1103

The UN have updated their manual on energy statistics byRoberta Quadrelli
publishing the International Receommendations on Energy
Statistics (IRES), approved by the UN Statistical Commission in
2011. The process has engaged international consultation oforganisations (interEnerStat) and countries (Oslo City Group) for
about a decade or so. We should absolutely include this reference!
https://unstats.un.org/UNSD/energy/ires/default.htm and explain
much more in detail its scope and relevance. IEA can provide
paragraph on this.

Accepted

The reference has been included.

742

1

2

1107

1133

Several hypertext links are not functioning for example: rows
1107, 1123, 1130, 1133 (Yearbook) and in references,
number 25 hypertext link are not funkctioning

Accepted

Hyperlinks checked.

6016

1

2

1107

1107

Broken link: "https://unstats.un.org/unsd/pubs/gesgrid.asp?ID=51" Ana Blondel

Accepted

Hyperlinks have been checked.

8938

1

2

1109

Special Reference to the Energy Accounts and long description of Roberta Quadrelli
its scope may be confusing here as inconsistent with principles
governing the IPCC energy statistics reporting; please movereference to IRES upfront as this is the key reference for energy
statistics now.

Accepted withmodification

IRES reference moved upfront. Rest of the comment refers tounchanged text.

6018

1

2

1123

Broken link: "https://unstats.un.org/unsd/pubs/gesgrid.asp?ID=37" Ana Blondel

Accepted

Hyperlinks have been checked.

8940

1

2

1124

The Iea is updating is manual, to adjust to the IRES requirements. Roberta Quadrelli
Placeholder here as the new version is not yet published but itshould be by next year.

Noted

No change was made in the text as the Authors have to abide by the
cut-off dates for consideration of new literature.

8942

1

2

1126

it may be also relevant to include the link to the Methodologies and Roberta Quadrelli
sources of the IEA World Energy Balances as ther eis a list of data
sources on energy by country. Noting that IEA is also welcoming
feedback.
http://wds.iea.org/wds/pdf/WORLDBAL_Documentation.pdf

Accepted

The reference has been included.

6020

1

2

1130

1130

Accepted

Hyperlinks have been checked.

6022

1

2

1133

1134

Broken link:
Ana Blondel"https://unstats.un.org/unsd/pubs/gesgrid.asp?mysearch=energy&a
mp;sort=title"
Broken link: "UNSD Statistical Yearbook."
Ana Blondel

Accepted

Hyperlinks have been checked.

6024

1

2

1202

1202

Accepted

Hyperlinks have been checked.

6026

1

2

1243

1243

Broken link: "http://www.fao.org/world-censusAna Blondel
agriculture/wca2020/en/"Should be "remote sensing" or "remote observation" instead of "r e Ana Blondel
mo t e"Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

1123

Lenka Zetochová

Comment ID Volume Chapter
6028
1
2

From line To line
1271
1271

Comment
Broken link "http://reports.eea.eu.int/technical_report_37/en"

ExpertAna Blondel

Response
Accepted

Authors' note
Hyperlinks have been checked.

10146

1

2

273+

273+

IEA database on Energy Balance"https://www.iea.org/Sankey/#?c=Middle East&s=Balance"

Wafa Aboul Hosn

Accepted

Hyperlinks have been checked.

10154

1

2

all

all

This chapter is highly dense with terminology. Do you intend thisto be utilized in a developing country? Then supporting /traning
documentation needs to be attached or directed to.

Malini Nair

Accepted withmodification

Text and materials have been reorganised in order to be more userfriendly.

7038

1

2

GeneralThe scope of this chapter is sometimes missunderstood as only
Vitor Gois Ferreira
dealing with activity data. A clarification that also deals withparameters and Efs could be made in the beginning of the chapter

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

8898

1

2

GeneralOverall, the chapter (e.g. introduction, flow chart; relevant
Roberta Quadrelli
sections) could emphasise more the need for a strategic approachat national level on data collection/sharing. All elements appear in
the text at some points, but they could be gathered andstrengthened to describe the upfront need for the institution
responsible for inventory to understand the national landscape of
relevant data (including activity data): to identify the institutions
that collect/hold relevant data; engage them in cooperation to sharedata and to collect missing data, also assessing whether a new datacollection may fit multiple purposes - to optimise use of resources
at national level. This is very important expecially addressing thosecountries where a national system still needs to be developed. For
example, in our experience (IEA), in some cases environmentrelated data collections are established without synergy withexisting/planned energy data collections, while data strongly
overlap and a common activity could fit both purposes. Also, we
would not like to develop multiple datasets that are not consistentamong each other. Need for such cooepration has also emerged
within a recent joint IPCC/IEA data meeting. The IEA can share
more of its experience if needed.

Accepted

Text amended.

376

1

2

Issue of data acrchaivig and back upshould also be discussed.
Jamidu Katima
Experinec has shown after the inventory data is not stored in a waythat it can be retreaved

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

2506

1

2

Entire chapter needs thorough proof-reading, typos were foundthroughout. Section 2.3.4 needs attention - some sentences seem
incomplete.

Anna Mikis

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

8560

1

2

(Ganesan et al., 2017; Fadnavis et al., 2016; Tiwari et al, 2014;
Tiwari et al., 2011) profer format

Amanullah Dr.

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

336

Comment ID Volume Chapter
8570
1
2
8558

1

2

3474

1

3

3474 (cont.)

From line To line

1

Comment
very less citaion and lack of new literature in whole chapter

ExpertAmanullah Dr.

Response
Accepted

Authors' note
The comment has been addressed in SOD.

272

et al. (2012).

Amanullah Dr.

Accepted

Editorial.

1

This chapter does not have much on LULC area estimate
Doug King
uncertainty analysis and propagation through emissions
calculations. I understand that it is written generally, perhaps torepresent the diversity of activity data types. However, themethods of error propagation and monte carlo type sensitivity
analysis that are presented are based on data distributions,
including means, standard deviations and standard errors, and suchmethods don't seem applicable to classification-based area
estimates. If classification/mapping is to be used to determine
total areas for given LULC classes, it is unclear to me how
uncertainty in those area estimates, which are a result ofclassification error, can be incorporated into the given methods.
Classifications have accuracy levels and confidence intervals foreach class in both errors of commission and omission. I imagine
the uncertainty associated with errors of commission would be
used to determine the uncertainty bounds for the total area coveredby a given class. But these are total areas, not averages withstandard deviations so the methods of this chapter don't appear tobe appropriate. Should there be text in this section or in Vol 4, Ch
3 that describes how uncertainty in these area estimates per classpropagates through estimation of uncertainty in total emissions perclass? Also, with respect to land conversions, errors in a map attime 1 and another map at time 2 combine to produce error in thetemporal change output. The accuracy of each class in each map
represents the probability the assigned class is correct, and thus
combining two maps to determine land use conversions/stability
must combine the accuracy probability of each in some way toestimate the error of output.

Accepted

Additional material has been added to Chapter 3 providing a
conceptual basis for the approaches to be described in detail in
Volume 4. Subsection "UNCERTAINTIES ASSOCIATED WITH
ACTIVITY DATA" of Section 3.2.1.2 " has been refined
improving the descriptions of the approaches and including thesurvey sample variance equations. Land use data can be collectedusing three approaches, and it is possible to determine theconfidence intervals for total area estimates with either of the three
approaches. Approach I is a reporting of areas without knowledgeof the specific locations. This could be done if land owners reporttheir land uses without references to specific locations, such as in aquestionnaire. In essence, this could be a survey if the information
is gathered from a sample of land owners, or a census if data arecollected from the entire population. Surveys have very welldefined statistics for estimating variances given the sample error forthe responses, which in this case are areas. In theory, a census does
not have sampling error because responses are provided for every
element in the population. However, there may be uncertainty due
to biases in the classification, non-responses, and problems withcoverage (e.g., due to clouds in remote sensing imagery).

For example, overlaying of two maps from time 1 and time 2 in an
AND operation requires multiplying the accuracy probabilities forthe classes at t1 and t2 - if the maps are independent.
They are generally not independent so conditional probabilities
come into play. I have only basic knowledge of the methods but
there is much literature on this topic, including how torefine/improve class areas estimates using the errors derived fromerror matrices.

These errors can be quantified. Approach 2 is a survey approachand uncertainty can be quantified using well-established statisticalmethods for surveys as discussed above. Land use data that arecollected from a sample of locations across a country would be an
example of Approach 2, and the variance calculations depend on
the sample design. Approach 3 is a wall to wall mapping of landuse, and as such, is a census. A census can have errors as discussed
above. Further guidance has been provided on the methods forquantifying these errors.

Comment ID Volume Chapter
2048
1
3

From line To line
1606

Comment
ExpertI wish to apply to uncertainty analysis same logic applied for the
Sandro Federici
key category analysis [see Chapter 4 (149-156): "Emissions andremovals:...the analysis should be performed for emissions andremovals separately within a given category. For example, the land
use categories and the pool estimates can include emissions andremovals that may cancel or almost cancel at the aggregated level
for the categories presented in Table 4.1 resulting in an aggregated
net estimate that does not qualify as a key category despite thecomponents (emissions and removals separately) being
significant..."].
Indeed, same problem occurs in the uncertainty analysis when
adding large emissions and removals that sum up to a small
positive/negative value.
This can be easily achieved by using absolute values for eachcomponent of the denominator of equation 3.2.

Response
Accepted withmodification

Authors' note
Footnote added.

1774

1

3

1

606

The Uncertainty guidance never explains how to develop
uncertainty for a parameter, only how to combine them. It would
be helpful to have a clear section on how to develop confidencebounds, etc. for individual parameters.

Melissa Weitz

Noted

No action can be taken because comment is out of scope of 2019
Refinement.

4374

1

3

23

24

with or without "-"?

Kewei Yu

Rejected

10264

1

3

48

553

There is some very good material here, but It is difficult toFrank Neitzert
properly evaluate the Chapter 3 FOD. It appears that portions of
the original Guidelines meant to be retained are not included, but it
is often not clear what parts are to be retained or where theelaboration will be placed in relation to them. It is recommended
that the whole of Chapter be included in the SOD (which theoriginal text appropriately identified).

Accepted

The title of the section is the same of the 2006 IPCC Guidelines.
No action taken.
Recommendation implemented in the SOD.

10266

1

3

58

90

Noted

No action needed.

6998

1

3

59

90

Very useful overview of some of the main purposes of inventory Frank Neitzert
uncertainty estimates.
Thank you for this part. It is a good update to the previous version Vitor Gois Ferreira

Noted

No need for further action.

8572

1

3

59

remove whole line no need

Amanullah Dr.

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

10268

1

3

60

60

Frank Neitzert

Accepted

Text changed as proposed.

7110

1

3

62

62

The first sentence is a compelling, but "at the core of the effort"
seems overly-strong. Suggest "an imortant part" or an "integral
part".
replace 'contain' with 'contains'

Amanda Penistone

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

7000

1

3

70

70

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

7004

1

3

72

75

Accepted

10270

1

3

74

75

Is reference to the 2006 GL relevant here? I assume that the table Vitor Gois Ferreira
will stay in the 2019 Refs.
This part is somehow abstract and appears unrelated to otherVitor Gois Ferreiranomenclature used in the guidelines. Propose to revisit
This line contains one of several references to the old text in the
Frank Neitzert
2006 Guidelines, from the viewpoint of it being an external
document. This is somewhat confusing. Presumably these will be
removed in the SOD.

Third line modified for clarity and consistency with language in the2006 IPCC Guidelines.
Linked to the final structure of the MR.

Accepted

Comment ID Volume Chapter
4376
1
3

From line To line
74

Comment
Chapter, uppercae, check other places.

ExpertKewei Yu

Response
Accepted

Authors' note
Linked to the final structure of the MR.

8994

1

3

76

76

Tiwari Yogesh

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

7112

1

3

78

78

uncertainty dependence: also to the spatio-temporal scales of thedesired estimations
insert 'the' between 'be' and 'result'

Amanda Penistone

Accepted

Change effected as proposed.

7114

1

3

80

80

replace 'approaches' with 'approach'Amanda Penistone

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

7116

1

3

82

82

replace 'need' with 'needs'

Amanda Penistone

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

10272

1

3

82

82

The statement "...every collected data value needs to have anFrank Neitzert
associated uncertainty assessment…" implies the separate
evaluation of each element of data, which is often not possible.
Suggest the use of terminology such as "…all data collected shouldhave an associated uncertainty assessment..."Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

7002

1

3

84

90

This addition to the guidance is very important, but the way it isVitor Gois Ferreira
framed is a bit demotivating for the inventory compiler. Instead of
stating that it is not a goal per se, the 2019 Refs could indicate thatit should not be prepared as an indepent goal, but to link directlywith the last sentences: as a tool, together with KCA, etc

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

7118

1

3

84

84

insert 'point' after 'out'

Amanda Penistone

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

8574

1

3

91

3.1.2 move to next page

Amanullah Dr.

Accepted

Proposed edit implemented.

8576

1

3

93

remove whole line no need

Amanullah Dr.

Noted

No action needed.

4326

1

3

94

103

It seems that these descriptions are suitable to be located in
Naofumi Kosaka
Chapter 1 of Volume 1 rather than Chapter 3, because Chapter 1
discusses institutional arrangements. Also, the linkage between thedescriptions and uncertainty is weak.

Accepted withmodification

Figure and text have been made consistent with descriptions andterminology in chapter 1. Both chapter 1 and chapter 3 authors
think it is useful to have description here on how the uncertainty
analysis fits in the overall process. However consistency and crossreference between chapters is essential.

7006

1

3

96

117

Accepted withmodification

Figure and text have been made consistent with descriptions andterminology in chapter 1.

10274

1

3

98

98

Accepted

Text changed not to discuss institutional arrangements.

1766

1

3

98

105

This information does not appear to fit here and may cause some Vitor Gois Ferreira
confusion to new inventory compilers or new Parties. It should be
moved, as relevant to Chapter 1
This sentence seems to imply that for each annual inventory, aFrank Neitzert
Party should re-evualate its institutional arrangements. This seems
unnecessary, if there have been no changes.
It's unclear how this relates to uncertainty assessment.
Melissa Weitz

7790

1

3

99

99

Accepted withmodification
Rejected

786

1

3

100

100

Accepted

Text is modified to increase the focus on how uncertainty fits in theoverall picture.
The sentence has been deleted taken into consideration othercomments.
Reference to chapter 6 has been included.

7120

1

3

118

118

8578

1

3

120

8996

1

3

122

4378

1

3

123

7122

1

3

123

It would be appropriate to say “should be revised” instead of
Nataliya Stranadko“should be revisited”.
when discussing "verification" and "reviews under the UNFCCC", Wilfried Winiwarter
it would be good to also refer to chapter 6 (QA/QC) of the same
volumetext in diagram is blurry, try to source a higher resolution version Amanda Penistone

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

remove whole line no need

Amanullah Dr.

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

123

would also cover increased availabaility of data or additional
observational constraints"focuse on" not "focus of"

Tiwari Yogesh

Data availability is included in the text.

Kewei Yu

Accepted withmodification
Accepted123

replace 'of' with 'on'

Amanda Penistone

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

Comment ID Volume Chapter
7792
1
3

From line To line
123
124

Comment
ExpertI would suggest to avoid future tense and using “will”. IPCC
Nataliya Stranadko
produces Guidelines, and present time would be more appropriate
to use. Thus, the phrases would be “the improvement focuses” and“the goal includes”.

Response
Accepted

Authors' note
The comment has been addressed in SOD.

10276

1

3

123

123

The statement "Most frequently, the improvement will focus on
Frank Neitzert
getting better data...." seems too strong. Suggest something more
like "Often the improvement will focus on getting better data...."

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

10278

1

3

124

124

Accepted withmodification

4328

1

3

129

143

Instead of "The goal will include increasing the accuracy…"
Frank Neitzert
suggest "The goal will generally include increasing the accuracy…
"
It seems that these descriptions and Figure 3.2 are suitable to be
Naofumi Kosaka
located in section 3.2.3 because they are the guidance for the
choice of Approaches.

1454

1

3

135

135

Accepted

10282

1

3

142

142

replace "of" with "or": … assessment for a source "or" sink
Regine Röthlisberger
category…
At the bottom left hand corner of Figure 3.2 is a sequence of two Frank Neitzert
steps: 'Apply Approach 2 for combining uncertainties' followed
by 'Apply Approach 1 for combining uncertainties for QA/QC'. It
is not clear what the second step is referring to at this stage of thedecision tree.

Text changed to: "The goal is generally to increase the accuracy of
the inventory through a better representation of theemissions/removals processes".
Figure kept at current place as it describes the steps on theuncertainty analysis and not only the choice of approaches. Title offigure changed to reflect that. Figure is already referred back in
section 3.2.3.
The comment has been addressed in SOD.

AcceptedContent of the box has been changed to "Apply Approach 1 too, asa QA/QC tool".

1768

1

3

142

143

Be clearer on what data is collected for uncertainty assessments
Melissa Weitz
and how to assess bias. It seems like this figure is a mix of 2
things: 1, the actual uncertainty analysis which results in
confidence intervals, etc. and 2. Reducing uncertainty in the GHGI
(which is a longer term process). For example, if a compiler was
calculating uncertainty for an annual inventory, they would notstop in the middle of the assessment to attempt to eliminate bias in
the estimates.

Accepted withmodification

Agreed that processes are interlinked as well as performed insequence. Figure 3.2 has been modified to better show the
relations.

10158

1

3

142

143

This is a flow chart, not a decision tree. A decision tree, if it has
uncertainities has probabilities attached to it

Malini Nair

Accepted withmodification

The chart is a decision tree by the IPCC definition. Title ismodified to better describe its content.

10280

1

3

142

142

Frank Neitzert

Accepted withmodification

Content changed to "Data specification".

7124

1

3

143

143

Figure 3.2, first 'square' of decision tree includes the term 'Data
Definition'. This wording is also found in line 123, but themeaning is unclear. Should the wording in the figure be 'Define
Data to be Collected'?
this diagram also comes out a bit pixelated

Amanda Penistone

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

8580

1

3

144

147

text missing

Amanullah Dr.

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

3988

1

3

144

145

pg. 3.7: It should be made clear in the text that, even if there is no Hans-Dieter Haenel
refinementt, the number of this chapter has been changed.

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

3990

1

3

146

147

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

8582

1

3

149

pg. 3.7: It should be made clear in the text that, even if there is no Hans-Dieter Haenel
refinementt, the number of this chapter has been changed.
remove whole line no need
Amanullah Dr.

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

Accepted withmodification

Comment ID Volume Chapter
4790
1
3

From line To line
150
150

Comment
Should be "provides" rather than "provide"

7794

1

3

150

150

7008

1

3

150

150

4380

1

3

153

7010

1

3

157

10284

1

3

5586

1

2106

ExpertDonna Giltrap

Response
Accepted

Authors' note
The comment has been addressed in SOD.

The word “provide” should be changed to “provides”. Section… Nataliya Stranadko
provides…
The reference to the 2006 GL makes unclear if the rows 150 - 167 Vitor Gois Ferreira
are additional or notbiases?
Kewei Yu

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

Rejected
Accepted

Mention of the 2006 IPCC Guidelines is just a reference. The text
is new.
Phrase "bias in general" was used, not particularly biases.

167

These two paras appear to fit better under section 3.1.7

Accepted

Addressed in section 3.1.6.

158

159

Accepted withmodification

Focus of the paragraph is data quality. "Investigation-focused" maybe a too strong language. The paragraph has been edited and"investigation-focused" deleted.

3

168

209

Comment: Shouldn't an 'investigation-focussed approach toFrank Neitzert
uncertainty' identify more than "the causes of data quality
problems"?. Suggest that some other possibilities be mentioned aswell.
A general comment to the subsection: reducing uncertainties can Attila Buzasi
be improved by using mathematical-statistical methods, thus
hidden interrelations between indicators can be revealed. Factory
analysis, correlation analysis or any other well-usable and defined
methodologies may contribute to reduce uncertainties via
dimension reduction.

Rejected

The mathematical-statistical methods can help in improving theevaluation of the uncertainty, particularly in the refinement of theparameters used in the assessment as in the Montecarlo analysis.
But they do not imply a reduction of the uncertainty.

1

3

183

183

Noted

4330

1

3

185

186

Accepted

Agree that consistency is necessary. The sentence comes from the2006 IPCC Guidelines. The 2006 IPCC Guidelines use both terms.
In Section 3.1.3 of the 2006 IPCC Guidelines, "bias" is defined as"systematic error".
Suggestion implemented.

2108

1

3

189

190

Here the term "systematic error" is introduced while in the
Erik Næsset
preceding text of this chapter the term "bias" has been used. Are
they meant to be the same? Please consider consistency interminology.
I suggest that the authors replace the URLs in the footnotes to
Naofumi Kosaka
References (line 588 through 606).
Why random sampling in particular? If the point is to have a
Erik Næsset
probabilistic sampling design, then say so and other designs suchas systematic may be viable options (my point is: is it theprobabilistic nature of the sample that is the point here or even that
random sampling is applied; the latter may exclude someprobabilistic designs frequently used in sample surveys for GHG
inventories, e.g. national forest surveys, which are often systematicwith random start).

Accepted

The word "Random" was deleted.

2110

1

3

191

191

Comment on "simultaneous sampling": I'm not sure what you
mean by this term; perhaps you actually mean "simultaneous
observations" for the same sample units?

Accepted

The word "Simultaneous observations" was used.

2112

1

3

196

196

The concept dealt with here seems to be random sampling, i.e. a
Erik Næsset
probabilistic sampling method. Now, in inference based on
probabilistic sampling (design-based) as well as in nonprobabilistic sampling (e.g. when model-based statistical inferenceis adopted) a particual estimate is not biased; bias is a property ofan estimator or procedure. So to the extent that the point here is tomake a statement about probabilistic sampling as such, I thinksome rephraseing is needed to conform to standard statisticallanguage.

Accepted withmodification

Focus is on "collecting more data that are measured" that can
reduce uncertainty regardless of the situation or technique applied.
Language has been revised.

7012

1

3

206

209

This part is important. Why not include it in the list above such as Vitor Gois Ferreira"Using more accurate methods"?

Accepted

Paragraph has been treated as a bullet.

Vitor Gois Ferreira

Erik Næsset

Comment ID Volume Chapter
8584
1
3

From line To line
210
242

Comment(aruthor et al., year) this is proper format

2038

1

3

210

4382

1

3

211

1770

1

3

212

246

242

ExpertAmanullah Dr.

Response
Accepted

Authors' note
Treatment of references assessed.

I would add the following comment to the figure: "Note that the
Sandro Federici
central value of the Tier 2 estimate is within the confidence
interval of Tier 1, and that the central value of Tier 3 estimate iswithin the confidence intervals of Tier 2 and Tier 1. Which meansthat the three methodological approaches can be judged eqaully
valid given the variability of the observed population; although, theuncertainty accoridng to the Tier hierarchy".

Accepted withmodification

The terminology "is equally valid" is not correct but the threemethods are likely to provide unbiased estimates. Text was added
to better describe the issue.

"IN AS"?

Accepted

Corrected: "in a".

Accepted

More information has been added to explain how the uncertainty
was quantified. In brief, a Monte Carlo simulation approach wasused for all three methods after developing PDFs (joint probability
distributions that address key covariances among quantities). The
Tier 3 method also employed an empirically based method toaddress uncertainty in model structure. It is difficult to know for
certain that the improvements produce more accurate estimates
because we do not have an ominiscient view of the emissions (if wedid, then estimation would be unneccessary). However,incorporating data specific to a country for estimating Tier 2emission factors will better represent the population of sources in
the country for this category (croplands in this example). The Tier 1
factors are based on samples from a larger global population, which
has considerably more variation in climates, soils and othervariables driving soil organic matter dynamics, and all of thisvariation is not relevant for the country of interest. Of course, thisalso depends on the compiler having an adequate sample to derive
the Tier 2 emission factors. For the Tier 3 method, the compilers
incorporated scientific understanding of soil organic matter
dynamics using the Century model, which embodies key processes
and structure that influences soil C stock changes.

Kewei Yu

It would be helpful to have additional information on how
Melissa Weitz
uncertainty was quantified in each instance and how it is known
that the updates were improvements. In some cases, better data forthe estimates also allow for better quantification of uncertainty andthat some times may result in wider uncertainty ranges.

1770 (cont.)

4384

We rely on scientific studies and findings from peer review
literature to develop and/or implement more sophisticated methods.
But again, the results do not have to be more precise with a higher
tier method, or even accurate in some cases. This depends on the
precision of the model inputs, representativeness of the model
and/or emissions data, and implementation, and requires sufficient
data and testing. The compilers for this inventory did test the modelwith independent data, which can highlight in our revision and used
this testing to propagate additional error through the Monte Carloanalysis (mentioned above). Some of these issues are discussed
further in the new Tier 3 methods guidance for this report, but moredetail has been added to better convey this case study.
1

3

223

soil types

Kewei Yu

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

Comment ID Volume Chapter
10286
1
3

From line To line
235
238

Comment
ExpertOverall, the text box seems to provide a good example. However, Frank Neitzert
suggest a caution be placed in relation to the sentence between
these 2 lines. If the higher tier data collected is not representativeof the whole country or region, the tier 3 method may increase
precision, but its ability to reduce uncertinaty will be limited.

Response
Accepted

Authors' note
"In general" changed to "In theory".

3992

1

3

248

pg. 3.10: It should be made clear in the text that, even if there is no Hans-Dieter Haenel
refinementt, the number of this chapter has been changed.

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

8586

1

3

251

remove whole line no need

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

6944

1

3

251

251

section 3.2: Quantifying uncertainties seems to be a soundOnema Adojoh
approach for climate change prediction, however, an error limit(absolute value and relative data) for each region around the globe
should be added for each of the method of quantifying
uncertainties outlined in line 359 to 459. This is because, seasonalvariation across the various continents could sometimes be
inconsistent. Geologists and biologists are very relative inquantifying uncertainties whereas physicists and mathematicians
are absolute in predicting uncertainties. There should be an
amendment in line 343 to 346 to accommodate this discrepancies
in both fields of discipline for an effective quantification of
uncertainties in the future.

Noted

No action can be taken because comment is out of scope of 2019
Refinement.

4386

1

3

266

267

PDF, and other places

Kewei Yu

Accepted

Corrected.

4388

1

3

272

pdf? Two identifal abbreviations?

Kewei Yu

Accepted

Corrected.

2114

1

3

272

276

Twice in this paragraph it is referred to PDF and confidence
Erik Næsset
intervals for emission factors. However, uncertainty must be
characterized for other point estimates as well. For example, in thegain loss method, uncertainty must be assessed for the activity data
as well. So this statements must be formulated in a more generalway.

Accepted

Text is changed including reference to parameters and activity data.

7126

1

3

275

276

"...the confidence interval has a 95 percent probability of enclosing Amanda Penistone
the true but unknown value of the emission factor" is more
precisely "in an infinite number of independent experiments 95%of the time the true value of the emission factor would be within
the confidence interval"

Noted

A revised definition of confidence interval was provided in theglossary.

3994

1

3

277

285

pg. 3.11: It should be made clear, right at the beginning of the box, Hans-Dieter Haenel
that for a normal distribution the factor 2 between Uncertainty andSE is an approximated value.

Accepted withmodification

Value 1.96 used instead of 2.

51

1

3

278

278

Mingshan Su

Accepted

502

1

3

279

286

Why use "X" between "STANDARD DEVIATION" and"STANDARD ERROR"?
It will be helpful to clarify the meaning/definition of parameters"n" and "x"Virginia Sena

Accepted

Title changed to "Difference between Standard Deviation andStandard error".
Definitions were added.

249

Amanullah Dr.

Comment ID Volume Chapter
2116
1
3

From line To line
280
280

Comment
Here (and elsewhere - many places) the term "central estimate" isused. In previous parts of the text the term "point estimate" isused. Please consider the need for consistency in terminology.

ExpertErik Næsset

Response
Accepted

Authors' note
"central estimate is changed to "point estimate". The inconsistency
exists already in the 2006 IPCC Guidelines. In the vast majority of
the cases "point estimate" is used.

2118

1

3

280

286

Is there a need to define x_i and n as well?

Erik Næsset

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

2124

1

3

282

282

Use of the term "uncertainty" (here and in box 3.2 in general):Erik Næsset
please verify that the term uncertainty is used with the same
meaning (a confidence interval) in the entire 2019 guidance. Many
typically use it to mean standard error. I'm comfortable withanything as long as it is well defined and used consistently.

Accepted

Text checked for consistency.

2120

1

3

283

283

I think there is an error here. From our sample we can only
Erik Næsset
produce an estimate (mju-cap). You use mju as a symbol of that
estimate, which is uncommon (usually estimates are indicated withcap) but that is OK as long as the symbol is well defined (which isthe case). However, sigma is also a sample estimate, and thatneeds to be stated as well (line 280). Now, since we deal with asample and sample estimates rather than population parameters,
we lose one degree of freedom (mju is an estimate). Consequenlty
we need to divide by (n-1) rather than n in line 283.

Accepted withmodification

Assessment revisited.

4128

1

3

283

283

Why is not the (partly) bias-corrected estimate of standard
deviation (using Bessel's correction) used?

Accepted withmodification

2040

1

3

288

288

I understand that: "In summary, to calculate the uncertainty of the Sandro Federici
parameter of concern, the first step is to establish if it derives
either from the variability of the population (i.e. how much valuesof the population are spread), which is measured by the standard
deviation; or 2) from the variability of the mean of samples (i.e.
how much the mean values of the samples taken from the
population are spread), which is a measure by the standard error.
Case 1 occurs when using the mean value to estimate an individualof the population (e.g. the average C stock of a forest to infer the C
stock a single portion of that forest). Case 2 when using the meanvalue to estimate the entire population (e.g. the average C stock of
a forest to infer the C stock of the entire forest)."I would make such summary before the examples.

The correct equation has been shown. A comment has been added
pointing that n was used in the denominator as an approximation
for large n, to be consistent with the spreadsheet.
Text has been accepted with slight modification to ensure that there
is no misundertanding between the two cases.

Roland Fuß

Accepted withmodification

Comment ID Volume Chapter
2042
1
3

From line To line294
294

Comment
ExpertI would simplify the following sentence "..., but in the mean for
Sandro Federici
individuals of the same type, of the population from which thesample come." I guess you may just directly refer to population,
since any sample is just sampling the population to which pertains;
I mean, in case there are different strata within a population, asample taken in a stratum will be used just to estimate that specificstratum. So I would say "..., but in the mean of the population
sampled."Response
Accepted withmodification

Authors' note
The text has been modified to take into account the comment.

2122

1

3

295

295

Not just for emission factors, but for activity data as well (forErik Næsset
example estimation of areas in the AFOLU-sector). This comment
pertains to the use of the term "emission factor" in Box 3.2 ingeneral.

Accepted

Text has been modified clearly showing that the concepts are valid
for AD, emission factors or any parameter. "emission factor"
replaced by "parameter" (e.g. emission factor, carbon stock change
factor or AD)" as appropriate.

4332

1

3

305

315

Naofumi Kosaka

Accepted

Case 1, 2 and 3 are inserted.

1772

1

3

309

311

Melissa Weitz

1

3

310

310

2046

1

3

310

311

To enhance the understanding I would replace the following
sentence "We are therefore interested in the variability of thisfactor", with "We are therefore interested in the variability of themean (i.e. average annual value) of this factor"

Sandro Federici

Accepted withmodification
Accepted withmodification
Accepted withmodification

Text has been modified to increase clarity.

2044

I suggest that the authors include heading "Case 1", "Case 2" and"Case 3" before line 305, 312 and 315 respectively so as toimprove readability.
This implies that the uncertainty analysis is to cover a number ofyears. Is that the case, or is it for the most recent year?
Replace "…and changes" which "taken"

2126

1

3

320

320

Wording: 1) we do not "measure" standard deviation, but rather
Erik Næsset
"estimate" it. 2) "central value" or "point estimate"? See previous
comment on consistency

Accepted withmodification

Measured by changed to "calculated using". "central value"changed to "point estimate".

2128

1

3

322

322

What do you mean by "population/individuals"? Be precise.

Erik Næsset

Accepted

2130

1

3

328

328

population/individuals - see previous comment

Erik Næsset

Accepted

2132

1

3

328

328

case 2): what is this; I cannot see that you have defined a "case 2)" Erik Næsset

Accepted

In row 322 as well in row 289 "population" is used. In row 328"individuals" looks more appropriate. Further explanation has been
added.
In row 322 as well in row 289 "population" is used. In row 328"individuals" looks more appropriate. Further explanation has been
added.
Case 1, Case 2, Case 3 inserted.

3996

1

3

328

328

pg. 3.12: What does "as case 2)" refer to?

Hans-Dieter Haenel

Accepted

Case 1, Case 2, Case 3 inserted.

4390

1

3

328

case 2), ??

Kewei Yu

Accepted

Case 1, Case 2, Case 3 inserted.

8588

1

3

331

text missing

Amanullah Dr.

Accepted

Place holder. No action needed.

334

Sandro Federici

Text modified not exactly as the proposal, but increasing clarity.
Text changed to " …in the variability of this average annual
value".

Comment ID Volume Chapter
2138
1
3

From line To line
335
540

Comment
Expert
All these sub-sections and paragraphs seem to assume that
Erik Næsset
emissions estimates are to be produced by the gain-loss method
only (equations demonstrate EFxAD only and the text mentions
emission factors and activity data repeatedly). Should there
somewhere in this text be made a reference to uncertanity analysis
for the stock difference (stock change) method?

Response
Accepted withmodification

Authors' note
The methods in this section are general for sources across all
sectors in the guidelines. The case of the stock difference method is
an interesting one because re-sampling the same locations
longitudinally across time will almost certainly create strong
temporal covariances in the underlying data. In this case, it isrecommended that the inventory compiler use Approach 2 forpropagating those errors through the estimation. This case may beconsidered an example where approach 2 is more appropriate. An
example of this case has been provided in Box 3.1 in the SOD.

2136

1

3

337

337

Here and elsewhere: the combination of the terms "propagation of Erik Næsset
error" (approach 1) and "Monte Carlo simulations" (approach 2) israther awkward, but I guess this is standard IPCC language anddifficult to change. Here is my point: Monte Carlo is a simulation
technique (as stated), while approach 1 - as opposed to simulation- is an analythical approach. So approach 1 is an analytical
approach and approach 2 is a simulation-based approach. They areboth techniques used for error propagation!

Noted

The comment is technically correct but as stated in the comment
itself the current language is used throughout chapter 3 in the 2006
IPCC Guidelines. Clarification of the two approaches has been
provided across the whole chapter. No change has been made in the
text.

10288

1

3

349

351

Suggest changing "…requires assumptions that are frequently not Frank Neitzert
met, such as lack of significant correlations among the quantities
used in the inventories, or uncertainties that are less than +/- 30%of the quantity value." to "…requires assumptions that are
frequently not met, such as lack of significant correlations among
the quantities used in the inventories, uncertainties that are lessthan +/- 30% of the quantity value, or uncertainties that aresymetrically distributed."

Accepted

Language included.

2134

1

3

370

371

Somewhat strange to use a reference from physics (Bevington and Erik Næsset
Robinson 1992) in this general text. The generality of this text lies
within statistics, not physics. There should be boatloads offundamental statistical texts that could be used as reference (ifMandel 1984 is insufficent to appear alone).

Noted

No action can be taken because comment is out of scope of 2019
Refinement.

4334

1

3

389

392

I suggest that the authors include "(see also page 3.32, 3.61 andNaofumi Kosaka
3.62 of the 2006 IPCC Guidelines Volume 1)" at the end of line
392. These pages discuss how to deal with asymmetric uncertainty
in Approach 1.

Accepted

Language added referring to the Section 3.7.3 of the 2006 IPCC
Guidelines.

Comment ID Volume Chapter
3998
1
3

From line To line
390392

Comment
Expertpg. 3.13: Make unmistakably clear that in case of asymmetricalHans-Dieter Haenel
distributions the "greater half" of the 95 % confidence interval has
to be used in Approach 1. The current version of the text seems tooffer, in the example provided, the option to take 10 instead of 20.

Response
Accepted

Authors' note
Language corrected.

10160

1

3

398

444

I have not seen anyone use this method of aggregation of
uncertainities, in statistics. Has this been statistically proven. Are
you underestimating /overestimating?

Malini Nair

Rejected

Approach is the same of the 2006 IPCC Guidelines. Formulas
using percentage uncertainties are derived from the error
propagation equations using the variance of the quantities involved.
Original formulas are explained in the Annex of the GPG 2000.

7916

1

3

420

420

Clarify the difference between xi and Ui. It may be confusing tosome to understand the difference between the quantities and thepercentage uncertainties.

Raul Salas Reyes

AcceptedDefinitions have been separated.

2176

1

3

428

459

Variance formula (box Eq 3.3) and text: there is guidance provided Erik Næsset
for the two extreme cases of uncorrelated variables (r=0 between
EF and AD) and full correlation (r2=1) but not for cases with
0<r2<1. Why is that? It is stated (lines 430-431) that " it will be areasonable assumption that these values are uncorrlated". I'm notsure that is true, and especially not in light of the request from
IPCC for new or extended guidance on use of biomass maps andremotely sensed data in the AFOLU sector (Vol 4). So pleaseconsider to offer guidance for correlated variables as well. -And it
is simple! A first-order Taylor series approximation of the variancefor the product of two correlated random variables would bevar(ADxEF)=EF*EF*var(AD)+2*AD*EF*cov(AD,EF)+AD*AD*
var(EF).

Rejected

A footnote is included making reference to the Annex 1 of the GPG
2000 "Conceptual basis for uncertainty analysis" where theequations for consideration of partial correlations are presented. In
the GPG 2000 and the 2006 IPCC Guidelines the option was not toinclude partial correlations in Approach 1 to keep it simple. This
still should be the case in the MR2019. The Taylor expansion
including covariances has already been described in the Annex 1 of
the GPG 2000 "Conceptual basis for uncertainty analysis". It was
not included in the main body of both GPG and 2006 IPCC
Guidelines because the idea was to keep approach 1 simple andalso because of the decision to use the percentage uncertainties andnot the variances.

9610

1

3

459

459

I propose to add the guidance for dealing with different
disaggregation of uncertainties between emission factors andactivity data after line 459. Please find attached document for
further detail.

Rejected

The method proposed does not work in every situation (e.g. withremovals) and is prescriptive as it assumes uncorrelation between
the subcategories. The authors concluded there are not a set of
equations that would work in every situation and it would not beworth to increase the complexity of an approach that was developed
to be simple. In general, when information is lacking, in order toapply the approach 1 pre-processing is necessary, by expert
judgement of the individual values or by aggregation.

8590

1

3

487

490

no need of dots at the end, uniformity important in some place ; is Amanullah Dr.
given in such cases.

Noted

In 2019 Refinement text in bullets is formatted as follows:- When used with sentences - capital letters and full stops,- Otherwise, small letters, semi-colons, and full stop at end are used
for one sentence".
Considered during final copy-editing.

Naofumi Kosaka

Comment ID Volume Chapter
4336
1
3

From line To line
498
499

Comment
Expert
The proposed description may conflict with the description in page Naofumi Kosaka
3.32 of the 2006 IPCC Guidelines. The proposed one is very
simple but may be somewhat statistically inaccurate. The
description in page 3.32 is accurate when the PDF is lognormal but
this is not applicable when the PDF is other than lognormal.

Response
Accepted withmodification

Authors' note
A reference to Section 3.7.3 is included in Section 3.2.3.1.

4338

1

3

541

541

I support the addition of columns H and J in Table 3.1 because the Naofumi Kosaka
addition makes the calculation process of trend uncertainty clearer.

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

4340

1

3

556

556

I propose to add an equation and a table at the end of section
3.2.3.1. Please find attached document for further detail.

Naofumi Kosaka

Rejected

As shown in Figure 3.9 in the 2006 IPCC Guidelines, Uhigh andUlow are calculated pairwise given Uc. So they are notindependent. We can say that Uhigh is a function of Ulow. So theequation is not true for any given values of Uhigh and Ulow. Even
the factor of two example (Uc =73% replacing the confidence
interval (-50%, +100%) is an approximation. More precisely,
Uc=73% corresponds to (-53%, +88%). A reference to Section
3.7.3 is included in Section 3.2.3.1.

10162

1

3

all

all

I feel that this chapter is unnecessriliy complilcating confidence
intervals. Could have given a citation of any average statistics
textbook

Malini Nair

Rejected

No clear proposal of what should be deleted. Idea is to provide
simple explanations to the inventory compiler.

7014

1

3

General

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

2508

1

3

It appears that this chapter is under development, with parts
Vitor Gois Ferreira
missing and references to the 2006 GL. Additional comments may
be made for the SOD
Chapter needs proof-reading.
Anna Mikis

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

4392

1

4

27

28

key category, letter case consistency.

Kewei Yu

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

8594

1

4

31

34

remove bold

Amanullah Dr.

Revised to "substantial".

8596

1

4

48

no need of the whole line

Amanullah Dr.

Accepted withmodification
Accepted

6984

1

4

49

8598

1

4

8600

1

4

59

Editorial: Agree.

The following part is, apparently, removed form the current
Vitor Gois Ferreira
version: "It is good practice for each country to identify its national
key categories in a systematic and objective manner as presented
in this chapter. Consequently, it is good practice to use results of
key category analysis as a basis for methodological choice." I am
unaware that this is somehow covered under section 4.1.2, but para
78 in that chapter somehow changes the meaning of this important"good pratice for KCA". Reference to KCA and methods is in para
78 only related to improvements, while the previous good pratice
was more general.

Accepted withmodification

Addressed with revised text to include "It is good practice for eachcountry to identify its national key categories in a systematic andobjective manner" and additional edits.

61

no need of the whole line

Amanullah Dr.

Accepted

Editorial: Agree.

68

no need of the whole line

Amanullah Dr.

Accepted

Editorial: Agree.

Comment ID Volume Chapter
5860
1
4

From line To line
70
72

Comment
Not sure the word “maintained” is most appropriate. Seems likethe emphasis should be on “prioritizing” the improvement ofmethods, activity data and EFs for key categories. The word
maintained just implies keeping thing the same.

ExpertVincent Camobreco

Response
Accepted withmodification

Authors' note
Revised to "Regular Update".

4394

1

4

74

75

QA/QC are not defined before use.

Kewei Yu

Accepted

For definition refer to chapter 6.

1776

1

4

101

102

1

4

115

115

Accepted withmodification
Accepted

Added "or decreasing emissions or removal".

5862

Decreasing trends may also be important, as explained later in the Melissa Weitz
chapter
insert “categories to” before “prioritise”.
Vincent Camobreco

7128

1

4

115

115

replace 'prioritise' with 'priorities'

Amanda Penistone

Replaced with "Priorities".

6030

1

4

115

115

Text not clear, possible typo: should be "priorities" instead of"prioritise"?

Ana Blondel

Accepted withmodification
Accepted withmodification

1456

1

4

120

163

Add paragraph providing guidance regarding key category analysis Regine Röthlisberger
for indirect CO2 emissions. If indirect CO2 emissions are reported
in the sector where the precursors are emitted, indirect CO2
emissions should be treated like a separate gas. If indirect CO2
emissions are reported as an individual source category, thiscategory should be added to the key category analysis.

Accepted with
Modification

This has been included as a qualitative assessment.

5864

1

4

123

123

Replace “identification” with “analysis”

Vincent Camobreco

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

6986

1

4

137

137

It could be more clear that instead of referring to "whenperforming the key category analysis", erring to the 'level ofdisaggregation"

Vitor Gois Ferreira

Accepted withmodification

Changed to "when considering category aggregation".

7060

1

4

137

137

It could be more clear that instead of referring to "whenperforming the key category analysis", referring to the 'level ofdisaggregation"

Vitor Gois Ferreira

Accepted withmodification

Changed to "when considering category aggregation".

6988

1

4

144

145

The example is ambiguous and the rule unclear, between N2O and Vitor Gois Ferreira
CH4 not all of the following is different: methods, assumptions,emission 145 factor data sources and related uncertainties differ
for each gas. The methods are basically the same. I cannot see how
HFP is that different since uncertainties could be different,
assumptions too, etc. Guidance on this important issue should be
improved.

Accepted withmodification

Text has been revised to improve clarity.

6990

1

4

149

156

What about pools? How far should they be disagregated?

Vitor Gois Ferreira

RejectedEmphasis is on categories.

504

1

4

155

155

Virginia Sena

1

4

158

158

Accepted withmodification
Noted

Number deleted.

2140

It is written "1." before the sentence "Similar considerations may
apply…" that does not has sense.
I guess it is unecessary to define AFOLU here.

Erik Næsset

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

Replaced with "Priorities".

No change implemented.

Comment ID Volume Chapter
332
1
4

From line To line
163
179

Comment
ExpertSome countries calculate GHG emission inventories as the sum of Adrian Leip
regions with (partly) independent assumptions, parameters,
uncertainties, methods. This introduces a further dimension. In
such cases, disaggregation of a source category which needs to be
split should first be disaggregated by region and only for thoseregions where the flow diagram still identifies the need for
disaggregation into sub-categories. If there are many regions, a
feedback on the choice of the parameters p_1 and p_2 could beconsidered.

Response
Accepted withmodification

Authors' note
We agree with the general case of identifying regional
disaggregation where appropriate. Text added to highlight thepossibility for Countries to subdivide by region in the categorygroup column in exceptional cases where regional differences inmethods applied are significant.

4834

1

4

163

179

"Disaggregation" will have profound impacts on the KCA results. Taka Hiraishi
Creation of excessively small disaggregated sub-sectors might
automatically remove such sub-catetorries from KCA. Morestraightforward and reasoned listing of sub-categories isrecommended. (Lines 127-130 agree to this.)

Accepted withmodification

Some considerations have been elaborated on the level ofaggregation/disaggregation of categories.

330

1

4

163

179

Table 4.1 currently suggest a pre-defined disaggregation of the
Adrian Leip
source categories and indicates possible further aggregation ordisaggregation as a function of the assumptions and uncertainties
used in the inventory. This approach should ensure that areasonable ‘number’ of source categories are used in the analysis:
if disaggregation goes too far, uncertain AD or parameters which
reasonably should be considered as ‘key’ will be hidden in several
source categories, some of them possibly not identified as a key
category. If the aggregation level is too large, the informative
power of the assessment diminishes as it remains unclear which
AD or parameter should be focused on for improving theinventory.
I therefore propose a transparent procedure rather than a selectionof source categories. Such a procedure will also ensure that the key
source assessment is independent from choices made by theinventory compiler.

RejectedThank you for this suggestion. However we feel it is too complex
and rigid while we are proposing a system of disaggregation whichbuilds on results and takes into account changes in methodologies
over time.

Please see supporting document Vol1_Ch4_L163_179_AL_a.docx
with an illustration of the routine.

Comment ID Volume Chapter
334
1
4From line To line
163
179

Comment
Expert
For the disaggregation of N2O emissions from manure
Adrian Leip
management and cultivation of managed soils I suggest to consider
emissions from manure management together with direct andindirect N2O emissions from soils application/deposition ofmanure, but differentiated by animal type. Only when a further
disaggregation is required emissions from manure managementand direct and indirect emissions from soils should be
differentiated. Motivation is that their uncertainty might bestrongly correlated through the N excretion rate. This ‘weakens’
the importance of downstream parameters, such as e.g.
FracLEACH. However, those parameters are commonly much
more difficult and costly to improve while the improvement of theN excretion rate in the time series for important animal types morefeasible.
Please see supporting document Vol1_Ch4_L163_179_AL_a.docx
with a proposal for the text in the relevant cells of Table 4.1.

Response
Rejected

Authors' noteThank you for this suggestion. However this aggregation is only
appropriate in cases where the mass balance approach is used. In allother cases it is not so useful to have this aggregation.

506

1

4

166

166

It is written "Gasses" instead of "Gases".

Virginia Sena

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

1458

1

4

166

166

eliminate (s): … Gas(s)es can be aggregated…

Regine Röthlisberger

Accepted

The comment has been addressed SOD.

4396

1

4

174

GWPs not defined before use.

Kewei Yu

Accepted

This has been updated.

4832

1

4

174

176

"GWP" should be changed to "GWP or any other CO2-equivalent Taka Hiraishi
values". Footnote 3 needs to be modifed on the similar line.

Noted

Text has been modified and reference to GWP removed. But nochange has been implemented to footnote 3 because the derivationof the threshold was based on GWP values.

1460

1

4

176

177

Footnote 3 regarding GWP: In the footnote, reference is made to Regine Röthlisberger
GWPs in IPCC Thrid Assessment Report (TAR). However, I think
it would be reasonable to update to at least the fourth if not the
fifth assessment report for the most recent GWP.

Rejected

The development of the threshold used the IPCC 2AR so this will
be kept as is. The methodology is applicable for other weightings
should they become the standard in reporting. The IPCC Guidelines
are not meant to prescribe any set of GWPs. GWPs instead are used
to illustrate their applications in various examples across theVolumes of the IPCC guidelines. For the examples in Section 4.5
CO2-equivalent values were calculated using the GWPs from SAR

2050

1

4

177

178

In footnote d of table 4.1 replace "...conversion of forestland..."with "...conversion of forest (deforestation)…"Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

Sandro Federici

Comment ID Volume Chapter
5866
1
4

From line To line
177
179

Comment
Expert
The revisions to Table 4.1 for AFOLU need to be re-assessed. The Vincent Camobreco
guidance in the previous version of 4.1 was much more
appropriate for AFOLU. For example, combining entericfermentation and manure management into a single key category
analysis if the same methods are used makes no sense. The
methods for enteric and manure are different at all Tier levels.
Additionally, these two sources can often individually be key
categories for many countries and combining them into a single
key category analysis loses the ability to assess where the focus
should be on improvements. Also the approach described for theland use categories (e.g., Forest Land Remaining Forest Land,
Land Converted Forest Land, Cropland Remaining Cropland…)
where the guidance is to “assess emissions, removal and carbon
stock change separately” is not useful advice. For countries using
the stock change approach, which is a higher level approach than
the growth—loss approach, the method does not result in separate
emission and removal estimates, only a single net stock change
number. From my review of the AFOLU portion of this table, I
believe the previous version in the 2006 Guidelines provided muchbetter guidance on how to perform a key category analysis for
AFOLU. Also, this table will need to take into account new
methods that may come from the 2019 refinementt process. For
example, if the new methods for reservoirs in flooded lands
remaining flooded lands and land converted to flooded lands areincluded then at minimum the methane emissions from that willneed to be brought into the key category assessment guidance,
currently it only deals with CO2.

Response
Accepted withmodification

Authors' noteAmmended text to include "Where possible, assess emissions,removal and carbon stock change separately".

6992

177

Table 4.1 changes may impact significantly on the KCA prepared Vitor Gois Ferreiraby countries (e.g. the separation by fuels is much less requested,
no longer consideration of significant animal tyoes, more flexibility
on carbon pools). This should be considered very carefully,
because of the impact on the inventories and the effort inventory
teams are placing in specific categories. This may change
significantly.

Accepted withmodification

Further clarifications have been added to the guidance text in Table
4.1 with disaggregation by fuel, animal type, pools suggested.

1

4

177

Comment ID Volume Chapter
6994
1
4

From line To line
177
177

Comment
Expert
The criteria for 3A1 and 3A2 is ambiguous, and should be made Vitor Gois Ferreiraclearer: If different methods are used to estimate emissions forenteric fermentation and manure management, then it is best to
disaggregate enteric fermentation and manure management. If
there are also differences in the data sources, assumptions appliedand uncertainties for the different animal numbers and or
management practices then these should also be disaggregated. If a
common approach (e.g. carbon/nitrogen balance approach) is used
across enteric fermentation and manure management then the
categories should be disaggregated according to the key
uncertainties in activity data, assumptions, emission factors etc.

Response
Accepted withmodification

Authors' note
Separated enteric fermentation and manure management.

6032

1

4

178

179

Table 4.1, row "3C1": given that the UNFCCC reporting
Ana Blondel
guidelines (CRF tables) allow countries
to report CO2 emissions from biomass burning separately fromthose associated to carbon stock changes if the available AD data
andmethod used allow to do so, a note should be added in this row
to consider that some countries may wish to include CO2
emissions from biomass burning under 3C1 depending on its
approach to report these emissions .

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

1462

1

4

178

179

Add line for indirect CO2 in the table

Regine Röthlisberger

Noted

Indirect CO2 emissions have not been included in the table because
inventory compilers can choose to include or not to include them inthe totals.

8602

1

4

182

no need of the whole line

Amanullah Dr.

Accepted

Removed.

6996

1

4

184

Vitor Gois Ferreira

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

8604

1

4

184

No much changes were made to this part. For the sake oftransparency, the parts unchanged should be shaded.
no need of the whole line

Amanullah Dr.

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

251

Comment ID Volume Chapter
2144
1
4

From line To line
185
204

Comment
ExpertHere and many places elsewhere in the entire guidance (mostErik Næsset
likely several of the sectoral volumes) I feel that there is a lack ofconsistency in the way "models" are treated. In the current text,
changes in satellite technology is used as an example of potential
creation of inconsistecies in time series. However, a land cover
map from satellite imagery is basically the result of a model
prediction/classification based on the digital numbers of the image(the reflectance) - a satellite does not measure land cover. In Vol 1,
Chap 2, Sect 2.2.2 (lines 402-403) the relationship between
models and data is clarified. It is stated stated that "models are ameans of data transformation and do not remove the need for data
to drive them". Translated to the current context, that means that if
good practice is followed, no inconsistency will be introduced byshifting from one satellite to another because both datasets will beequally well calibrated with relevant data. So in other words, it issimply not good practice to use a land cover map from satellite if it
is not properly calibrated with appropriate data. Finally, the term
"land cover" in this example should perhaps be replaced with "landuse" because land use is appropriate IPCC language, land cover is
not.

Response
Accepted withmodification

Authors' note
The reference to models has been refined and made consistent withother chapters.

9582

1

4

189

189

As for the uncertainty analysis, I would suggest also to provide an Denise Fussen Yanque
Excel-spreadsheet for the KCA - this would support the countries
to elaborate the analysis and permit the same appraoch by thecountries

Noted

Tables and examples have been updated so that it is easy for theinventory compiler to follow and reproduce the calculation. An
excel spreadsheet has not been provided since the assessement is
simpler than the one for uncertainty.

6650

1

4

198

208

Equation 4.1. Isn't the total contribution a sum of absolute valuesof Ext, is there a need to use index y? If y is used, please explainit.

Accepted withmodification

Corrected equation. "y" was used instead of "t" and "x".

1464

1

4

213

213

In Table 4.2 Column C should refer to the value of emissions orRegine Röthlisberger
removal, not the absolute value of emission or removal. Therefore,¦Ex,t¦ should be changed to Ex,t (remove vertical bars before andafter Ex,t).

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

6652

1

4

213

214

Table 4.2. There is an error in the column title C, should beemission or removal in the inventory year, not the abslute value.

Accepted

Editorial: Agree.

Tarja Tuomainen

Tarja Tuomainen

Comment ID Volume Chapter
9172
1
4

From line To line
216
220

Comment
ExpertThe Inventory of Quality is incomplete. If the authors
Peter Riggs
acknowledge that 'use of harvested woody biomass for energy
purposes does not belong to a defined and reported carbon pool,'then what are the 'relevant categories' for biomass energy? How
can biomass for energy be made into a more relevant category
given its increased prominence in renewable energy strategies andinternational trade?

Response
Noted

Authors' note
Comment transferred to Volume 2.
No action can be taken because comment is out of scope of 2019
Refinement.

4302

1

4

257

259

I suggest that the authors reconsider the equation. Lines 269 and
Naofumi Kosaka
270 state that "dividing by the absolute value of the overall
difference between the base year (year 0) and the target year (yeart) total inventories (the inventory trend)". However, it seems
Equation 4.2 does not reflect this sentence.

Accepted withmodification

Reconsidered and revised.

4304

1

4

257

259

Equation 4.2 of FOD is different from Equation 4.2 of the 2006
IPCC Guidelines and Equation 7.2 of IPCC Good PracticeGuidance and Uncertainty Management in National Greenhouse
Gas Inventories. I suggest that the authors describe the reason of
the change of the equation because I am not sure how the change
influences the result of trend analysis.

Naofumi Kosaka

Accepted withmodification

An improved explanation has been provided for this equation 4.2.

508

1

4

257

266

In Equation 4.2 the denominator is missing: the absolute value of
overall difference between the estimates for the base year and thetarget year of the total inventory.

Virginia Sena

Rejected

We checked this and the denominator is not needed as the results
Tx,t are normalized and ordered in table 4.3 for the final
identification of key categories.

510

1

4

275

276

It will help better understanding to include in Table 4.3 theVirginia Sena
notations for the Total estimates for base (Eo, total) and target year
(Et, total). It is the Totals of columns C and D that are used in the
Equation to calculate the Trend (column E).

Accepted

Added.

6654

1

4

288

289

The explanation for column G is incorrect.

Tarja Tuomainen

Accepted

Corrected.

4398

1

4

291

292

column, be consistent in letter case.

Kewei Yu

Revised to section 4.5.

1466

1

4

300

300

Reference to section 4.6: there is no section 4.6

Regine Röthlisberger

Accepted withmodification
Accepted

Corrected.

4308

1

4

327

328

It seems that there is a grammatical error.

Naofumi Kosaka

Accepted

Corrected.

2142

1

4

348

348

substantial or statistically "significant"? (perhaps "significant"should be reserved for the statistical meaning of the term).

Erik Næsset

Accepted withmodification

Revised to "substantial".

512

1

4

391

400

Parameters in Equation 4.3 are not clearly defined or not defined at Virginia Senaall. The Iceland example presented in Table 4.4.a clearly shows theprocedure, but I could not link the Equation´s rationale with thesame for the example.

Accepted

This section on ranking has been removed.

4306

1

4

393

400

I suggest that the authors clarify "x", "a" and "n" in Equation 4.3.

Naofumi Kosaka

Accepted

This section on ranking has been removed.

2510

1

4

Chapter needs proof-reading.

Anna Mikis

Accepted

chapter proof-read and updated in the SOD.

Comment ID Volume Chapter
4400
1
4

From line To line

Comment
In table 4.11, nitric acid and adipic acid production (adipic acidproduction probably more common)

ExpertKewei Yu

Response
Accepted

Authors' note
The comment has been addressed in SOD.

In refernces section only few refernces are given and most of them Amanullah Dr.
are very old. We must include new literture of 2018, 2017, 2016
and so on.

Accepted

Additional references have been included in the SOD.

Godonia, upper case

Kewei Yu

Accepted

Change effected as proposed.

Emmanuel Jonthan
Mpeta
Amanullah Dr.

Accepted

Change effected as proposed.

Rejected

8606

1

4

4402

1

5

32

6380

1

5

32

32

godonia' should be 'Godonia'

8608

1

5

38

43

text missing

7050

1

5

85

95

This is a very important paragraph, but it may be very difficult for Vitor Gois Ferreira
the inventory compiler to implement without help from the IPCC
Guidelines. It is of-course realistic to believe that the new default
in the 2019 GL represents a more recent situation than those in the2006 GL or the 1996 Revised GL. However, it may be very
difficult for the inventory compiler and expert reviewers to know ifthat is the case, unless the 2019 refinementts state that. For praticalreasons, for other situations not explicitly indicated in the 2019
Refs, it would be preferably not to accept in-consistent time-series
based on the use of defaults of IPCC EFs published at different
moments.

Accepted

The text in section 5.1 "introduction" is left deliberately as it is not
subject to the refinement.
The issue of emission factors (EFs) changing over time whilst
maintaining consistency was addressed in new guidance provided
in lines 220-237.

6520

1

5

95

95

It's better to add one sentence to the end of paragraf like "The date Serhat Sensoyof the changes in emission rates should be written in the metadata
file."

Accepted

Change effected as proposed.

6972

1

5

103

129

I could not identify any changes; I believe that this part should beshaded.

Vitor Gois Ferreira

AcceptedBox 5.1 shaded accordingly.

2052

1

5

117

117

The current text says: "...extrapolation for years after the last yearwith measured data available may be most appropriate."; I would
enahnce it as follows: "…extrapolation for years external to theavailable time series of data may be the most appropriate method
to apply, possibly using a proxy"

Sandro Federici

Accepted

Change effected as proposed.

4858

1

5

125

126

Is it rather 'Time series consistency must be applied to themodelling work as well' ? (possibly editorial)

Elsa Hatanaka

Accepted

Change effected as proposed.

8610

1

5

130

5.2.2 move to next page

Amanullah Dr.

Accepted

Change effected as proposed.

6382

1

5

156

for reasons for not ' suggested to replace with 'for reasons of not 'Accepted

Change effected as proposed.

8612

1

5

161

Emmanuel Jonthan
Mpeta
Amanullah Dr.

Rejected

The sentence is an introductory sentence indicating the type ofrefinement (in this case - elaboration) performed within section
5.2.3.

156

no need of the whole sentenceComment ID Volume Chapter
6384
1
5

From line To line
171
171

Comment
should so far as possible' proposes to read 'should as far as
possible'
factor, This' proposes to replace with 'factor. This'

ExpertEmmanuel Jonthan
Mpeta
Emmanuel Jonthan
Mpeta
Vitor Gois Ferreira

Response
Accepted

Authors' note
Change effected as proposed.

6386

1

5

176

176

Accepted

Change effected as proposed.

6974

1

5

203

205

The following part is not necessary here, because it is discussed
elsewhere: Therefore, the inventory compiler has to apply
appropriate data extrapolation methods to ensure that such 204
inconsistencies are limited as far as feasible.

Accepted

Change effected as proposed.

7052

1

5

203

205

The following part is not necessary here, because it is discussed
elsewhere: Therefore, the inventory compiler has to apply
appropriate data extrapolation methods to ensure that such 204
inconsistencies are limited as far as feasible.

Vitor Gois Ferreira

Accepted

Change effected as proposed.

2054

1

5

204

204

I would say "practicable" instead of "feasible"

Sandro Federici

Accepted

The proposed change is no longer relevant since the sentence that
contains this phrase has been removed.

1804

1

5

205

211

In the case of CH4 capture and flaring, it is now the case that
Melissa Weitz
countries may have good data to develop distinct emission factors
for activities with and without capture/flaring that do represent thebest available data and methods for those sources. Applying themethod specified here would involve back-calculating CH4
generation from net emissions data, when clearly it would be
prefered to use the net emissions data directly.

Accepted withmodification

Text added to address cases where separate emissions factors areused for activities taking place with and without mitigation.

3476

1

5

213

213

Section 5.3: Should regression methods be discussed with the data Doug King
overlap techniques given? Should splines (especially local splinesthat do not suffer from the limitations of global ploynomial
functions) be discussed for non-linear interpolation?

Accepted withmodification

Regression methods are generally complex and might introduce
complexity to the guidance for this chapter. This does not mean thatinventory compilers cannot apply them. The intention is tointroduce simple data gap filling methods that Inventory compilers
can apply readily by following the criteria stipulated in section
5.3.3.7. An example of application on non-linear methods wasprovided in Box 5.5 of the SOD.

6976

1

5

237

238

Box 2 could better fit in section 5.3.3 because it would be closer to Vitor Gois Ferreira
the discussion on the techniques to resolve gaps.

Rejected

Our view is that Box 5.2 is best suited were it is at the moment(section 5.3.1) because this section deals with issues of data gaps
and the reasons which by implications affects time seriesconsistency. The chapter is written in such a way that it flows
sequentially from unpacking issues and circumstances that result intime series inconsistencies and then providing guidance on how toaddress data gaps and other inconsistencies using splicing
techniques.

Comment ID Volume Chapter
6978
1
5

From line To line
239
277

Comment
This is an important box, and more information on how actually
the inventory could use the methodology in more recent years toprevious years (e.g. calculation of IEFs, surrogate data) could bevery helpful.

ExpertVitor Gois Ferreira

Response
Rejected

Authors' note
The observation is correct but the appropriateness of the data gap
filling methodology to be used will be determined by the nature andform of the data available. Therefore it is not possible to suggest
how such data gaps can be filled unless the inventory compilers
apply the gap filling methodologies and criteria described in section
5.3.3.7.

2056

1

5

251

251

I would say "practicable" instead of "feasible"

Sandro Federici

Accepted

The sentence that contains this phrase has been removed.

514

1

5

261

261

It is written "practises" instead of "practices".

Virginia Sena

Accepted

Change effected as proposed.

8614

1

5

279

text missing

Amanullah Dr.

Rejected

This is deliberate as there is no refinement that was performed forthis section.

7056

1

5

281

419

Giving that there is a new section on non-linear trend analysis, why Vitor Gois Ferreira
there is no section on linear trend/regression analysis? (apart froma small reference under eq. 5.2). This could be something to
improve in the guidelines.

Accepted withmodification

A new section has been added 'non-linear trend analysis'.

7054

1

5

281

400

The 2006 GL assumes that the calculation of interporlation andVitor Gois Ferreira
extrapolation is straightforward, but I believe that sometimes there
is some sort of ambiguity between interpolation/extrapolation andlinear regression analysis. For that reason, some equations
indicating how interpolation and extrapolation work could improvetransparency.

Rejected

Methodologies provided in this chapter are meant specifically toprovide guidance on interpolation/extrapolation methodologies thatare simple for inventory compilers. Inventory compilers areencouraged to apply sophisticated statistical methods for filling data
gaps provided that such methods are statistically sound.

516

1

5

320

321

Virginia Sena

Accepted

Change effected as proposed.

518

1

5

322

323

Virginia Sena

Accepted

Change effected as proposed.

6980

1

5

329

345

It is not necessary (and repetitive) to inlcude the title inside the
Figure.
It is not necessary (and repetitive) to inlcude the title inside the
Figure.
Presentation of the correction factor, in accordance with equation
5.1, could help clarity. The example uses eq 5.1 in essence, but
departs from the equation in terms of numemclature. Cross
reference could improve transparency.

Vitor Gois Ferreira

Accepted

Change effected as proposed.

4124

1

5

337

339

Noted

Our view is that it would be extremely difficult to provide guidanceon considerations how low variability is assessed. That is because
there are many available methods to make the assessment. Thisshould be at the discretion of the inventory compiler. Our proposal
is to change the guidance to be more qualitative, providing broad
guidance that allows for flexibility for inventory compilers. The
example in Box 5.3 demonstrates an example of low variability andconsidering the standard threshold of 80% for best fit in statisticalcorrelation. No action was made in the text.

This should give more guidance on when variability can be
Roland Fußconsidered "low variability". That might necessitate constructionof a confidence interval. Also, variability should be considered inrelation to the deviation from 1. In this example, there is a 7 % +3 % reduction.

Comment ID Volume Chapter
4126
1
5

From line To line
339
339

Comment
Why is not the (partly) bias-corrected estimate of standard
deviation (using Bessel's correction: SD = 0.0296) used?

ExpertRoland Fuß

Response
Noted

Authors' note
Our view is that it would be extremely difficult to provide guidanceon considerations how low variability is assessed. That is because
there are many available methods to make the assessment. Thisshould be at the discretion of the inventory compiler. Our proposal
is to change the guidance to be more qualitative, providing broad
guidance that allows for flexibility for inventory compilers. The
example in Box 5.3 demonstrates an example of low variability andconsidering the standard threshold of 80% for best fit in statisticalcorrelation. no action was made in the text.

6982

1

5

348

348

This section was not considered, but some list of possible
surrogate data for each sector could help inventory compilers

Vitor Gois Ferreira

Accepted

This has been considered in the revised version of this chapter. The
proposed table has described a list of indicative proxy parameters
by Sector as opposed to specific categories.

7308

1

5

350

398

Detailed statistics interpolation between the detailed estimates
Onema Adojoh
requires more than one method - line 362. Only linear interpolation
may not achieve these objectives. This is because enormous datafrom water and soil around the world are not the same. Hence, toobtain quality interpolation, more methods are required. Generaltrends or underlying parameters would need surrogation,
preferably it will be a good practice to compare interpolated
estimates with surrogate data using other methods such:1) Cubic, smoothed or locally weighted splines;
2) Linear or higher order polynomial regression.

Noted

The idea is to provide simple methods. Inventory compilers areencouraged to use much more sophisticated methods as long as themethods are scientifically sound. No change has been made in the
SOD text.

520

1

5

362

363

It is not necessary (and repetitive) to inlcude the title inside the
Figure.

Virginia Sena

Accepted

Change effected as proposed.

1802

1

5

365

365

Here and in other examples, it might make sense to walk through Melissa Weitz
why other options were not used. For example, would it not makesense to first see if the emissions track national oil production or
refinery throughput, and if so, develop EF for this source on a perproduction or per-throughput basis and then interpolate between
the 2003 and 2007 EFs and apply them to the annual AD on oil
production or refinery throughput (surrogate approach?).

Rejected

Section 5.3.3.7 and in particular table 5.1 is devoted to providing
guidance on the criteria for selection of splicing techniques.
Inventory compilers are encouraged to use more sophisticatedsplicing techniques provided such methods are scientifically sound.

1800

1

5

367

367

If fossil water incineration is not a source included in the IPCC
GL, it is confusing to note it here. Perhaps change the example?

Melissa Weitz

Accepted

Change "fossil water" to fossil liquid".

2460

1

5

367

367

Word water should be replaced with word waste in the heading

Päivi Lindh

Acceptedchange "fossil water" to fossil liquid".

Comment ID Volume Chapter
1778
1
5

From line To line
377
380

Comment
ExpertSpecify what should be done if there is a factor that impacts theMelissa Weitz
emissions and for which data are available, like quantity of liquid
fossil fuels incinerated. In that case, should they not interpolate
between the factors from 2003 and 2007 and apply the interpolated
factors to annual AD?

Response
Noted

Authors' note
The interpolation/extrapolation methodologies described here canbe applied to any parameter associated with the emission estimation
methodology. The example quoted is based oninterpolating/extrapolating emission results. No change has been
made on the text.

6522

1

5

400

400

There are no refinementt on trend extrapolation, but it is better todescribe it as linear interpolation is done in Box 5.4.

Accepted

Change effected as proposed.

2146

1

5

401

419

Non-linear trends can indeed be important to capture and model. Erik Næsset
This entire text seems relevant, but is much more "scientifc" inlevel of complexity/need for special knowledge than all previous
chapters of Vol 1. This is a dilemma. It would probably not be
possible for many countries to implement these procedures without
consulting special expertise - the scientifc citations provided would
not be sufficient. Perhaps an even more elaborated example withreference to relevant open source software would be useful (i.e. a
few more details than currently in box 5.5. - which is a niceexample, by the way)? Perhaps also provide some illustrative
examples of a chi-square analysis, as indicated in the text.

Noted

As reflected in the comment, the idea is to provide simple guidance
that can be applied by inventory compilers. Therefore, this example
is meant to provide guidance by applying a simple non-linear
interpolation technique. It is indeed true that the text contained in
section 5.3.3.5 is relatively complex but non-linear methods are
generally complex and the authors believe that the example
provided in this sections provides simple guidance for inventory
compilers to follow.

6390

1

5

415

415

imputing' proposes to replace with inputing'

Emmanuel Jonthan
Mpeta

Rejected

The word “impute” is deliberately used here for its statisticalmeaning rather than a mistake.

6388

1

5

419

419

impute' proposes to replace with 'input'

Emmanuel Jonthan
Mpeta

Rejected

The word “impute”is deliberately used here for its statisticalmeaning rather than a mistake.

1796

1

5

423

424

Provide more information on where this example came from. Be
clearer that the requirement is not a requirement of the inventory,
but of the IPCC/UNFCCC. Because the word "accounting" isused, is this guidance specific to Kyoto accounting?

Melissa Weitz

Accepted withmodification

Text has been changed accordingly.

1798

1

5

440

440

Be clearer in this example why a non-linear trend is the prefered
Melissa Weitz
option. Linear interpolation results in 14.44 (compared to 14.49),
which would seem to be reasonable, given uncertainties, and is far
less complicated. Perhaps an example with more years ofadditional data would be clearer.

Noted

Example has been chosen for simplicity reason.

Serhat Sensoy

Comment ID Volume Chapter
7058
1
5

From line To line
445
445

Comment
ExpertIn some cases, it may be difficult to extrapolate for the future,
Vitor Gois Ferreira
because there is uncertainty that the driver for the pattern issustainable or it continues. This situation may be quite common ininventories. There are other possible methods (average, carry on)that could be used, but there is no reference to them.

Response
Accepted withmodification

Authors' note
It would be difficult to provide examples for such scenarios but text
highlighting such challenges has been reflected in the guidance sothat inventory compilers can exercise caution.

10166

1

5

all

all

This chapter is highly complicated and not understandable by even Malini Naira regular Agriculture PhD. How are people in developing countries
going to understand it?

NotedThis guidance is considered simple and examples are provided todemonstrate how data gap filling methods could be applied. Nochange has been made to the text.

4860

1

5

Box 5.2

general

One other issue when applying e.g. facility level data is that the
Elsa Hatanaka
QC of the data is in the hands of the facility, and no longer in thehands of the statistical department or idustry association orcompiler, etc. It is odd if the compiler does not have at least a grip
on how the facility generally does its QC.

Accepted

Text added in the chapter to provide clarity that compiler should
request information on how the industry does its QC on the data it
has submitted.

4404

1

5

data sets or datasets, be consistent

Kewei Yu

Accepted

Changed the text to data sets to be consistent with original
guidance.

8616

1

5

all figures need proper title or foot notes

Amanullah Dr.

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

8618

1

5

Accepted

References updated and new literature is considered.

319

1

6

0

In refernces section only few refernces are given and most of them Amanullah Dr.
are very old. We must include new literture of 2018, 2017, 2016
and so on.
General comment: the text the whole volume "Uncertainty " isMilos Tichy
provided in a chaotic way and it is clear that it is a compilation ofseveral texts using different terms (or terms are associated todifferent meaning) and the same things are mentioned several timein different wording. mixing point estimates and interval estimatesis misleading. It requires a substantial rewriting. It is a guideline(not a scientific article i.e. it is to be short and concise.

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

4406

1

6

46

Guidance, letter case?

Accepted

Revised accordingly

586

YU KEWEI

Comment ID Volume Chapter
9866
1
6

From line To line
79
110

Comment
ExpertBox 6.1 is very welcome to help clarify the IPCC definitions, but David Glenshould be extended to encompass terminology often used around Thistlethwaite
the use of models (be they databases, spreadsheets, code) in
performing calculations, and then to pick these up in the newsection later in Chapter 6 on use of models. Good practice requires(i) MODEL VERIFICATION - i.e. checks to ensure that the model
calculation engine is performing as intended at the model
testing/commissiong stage, i.e. through testing of the model
calculations against the model specification (e.g. throughperforming parallel calculations in another model, or unit testing ofindividual sectuions of code), and (ii) MODEL VALIDATION i.e. checks on model outputs during annual inventory compilation,
to make sure the model is outputing sensible, correct data (e.g.
checks on IEFs against IPCC defaults, time-series consistency
checks, checks on the data derived for the latest year - is it
consistent with recent years, and so on). It would be helpful for
the IPCC guidance to address these good practice steps for models,and establish the IPCC terminology for such activities (which may
not be "VERIFICATION" and "VALIDATION", as I have used).

Response
Accepted

Authors' note
The comment has been addressed in SOD.

356

1

6

90

97

The current definition of Quality Assurance (QA) emphasises that Domenico Gaudioso
it should be planned and apply to the entire inventory. It should besomewhat revised to take into account that current practices
concerning QA activities mostly refer to cooperations between
Parties for the review of specific sectors of the inventory.

Accepted withmodification

The definition has been reviewed to make the process of QA more
explicit.

302

1

6

94

97

Delete, already mentioned elsewhere

Milos Tichy

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

5594

1

6

98

Here it would be a very good place to exemplify the verification
term with the newly used top-down tool for verification (together
with a reference to the section 6.10.2).

Stefan Reimann

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

4000

1

6

104

104

pg. 6.5: Delete "in" from "…in under…".

Hans-Dieter Haenel

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

8620

1

6

119

145

need improvement

Amanullah Dr.

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

303

1

6

126

128

It is not very comfortable for a reader to read in paralell two
wersions of the text. The text is to be full without quatations
except refferences. It appears also further.

Milos Tichy

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

Comment ID Volume Chapter
9012
1
6

From line To line
129
130

Comment
ExpertNo refinementt is proposed for section 6.5 QA/QC PLAN under Vishwa Bandhu Pant
which BOX 6.2 provides the information about various ISO
STANDARDS RELATED TO QUALITY MANAGEMENTSYSTEMS.
Comment: ISO continouslly reviews, updates, confirm andreleases the revised edition/version of standard - which isindicated by year of release and confirmation of being current.
Since the publication of 2006 IPCC 2006 IPCC Guidelines for
National Greenhouse Gas Inventories many ISO standard has beenreviewed, revised and confirmed. Thus keeping this fact into theconsideration standard mentioned in the BOX 6.2 shoulDetails d
be updated to reflect the cuurent applicable ISO standards.
Below rows provide the information about current edition/versionof ISO standards, which are mentioned in BOX 6.2.

Response
Accepted

Authors' note
The comment has been addressed in SOD.

9014

1

6

129

130

ISO 14064-1:2006 Greenhouse gases – Part 1: Specification with Vishwa Bandhu Pant
guidance at the organisation level for quantification( Note - This standard was last reviewed and confirmed in 2009.
Therefore this version remains current.)

Noted

No action can be taken because comment is out of scope of 2019
Refinement.

9016

1

6

129

130

ISO 14064-2:2006 Greenhouse gases -- Part 2: Specification with Vishwa Bandhu Pant
guidance at the project level for quantification, monitoring
and reporting of greenhouse gas emission reductions or removalenhancements ( Note - This standard was last reviewed andconfirmed in 2009. Therefore this version remains current.)

Noted

No action can be taken because comment is out of scope of 2019
Refinement.

9018

1

6

129

130

ISO 14064-3:2006 Greenhouse gases -- Part 3: Specification with Vishwa Bandhu Pant
guidance for the validation and verification of greenhouse gas
assertions ( Note - This standard was last reviewed and confirmed
in 2009. Therefore this version remains current.)

Noted

No action can be taken because comment is out of scope of 2019
Refinement.

9020

1

6

129

130

ISO 9000:2000 Quality management systems – Fundamentals and Vishwa Bandhu Pant
vocabulary has been revised by
ISO 9000:2015 Quality management systems - Fundamentals andvocabulary

Noted

No action can be taken because comment is out of scope of 2019
Refinement.

9022

1

6

129

130

ISO 9001:2000 Quality management systems – Requirements has Vishwa Bandhu Pant
been revised by
ISO 9001:2015 Quality management systems - Requirements

Noted

No action can be taken because comment is out of scope of 2019
Refinement.

Comment ID Volume Chapter
9024
1
6

From line To line
129
130

Comment
ISO 9004:2000 Quality management systems – Guidelines for
performance improvements has been revised by
ISO 9004:2009 Managing for the sustained success of anorganization - A quality management approach

ExpertVishwa Bandhu Pant

Response
Noted

Authors' noteNo action can be taken because comment is out of scope of 2019
Refinement.

9026

1

6

129

130

ISO 10005:2005 Quality management systems -- Guidelines for
quality plans ( Note - This standard was last reviewed andconfirmed in 2009. Therefore this version remains current.)

Vishwa Bandhu Pant

Noted

No action can be taken because comment is out of scope of 2019
Refinement.

9028

1

6

129

130

ISO/TR 10013:2001 Guidelines for quality management system
documentation ( Note - This standard was last reviewed andconfirmed in 2007. Therefore this version remains current.)

Vishwa Bandhu Pant

Noted

No action can be taken because comment is out of scope of 2019
Refinement.

9030

1

6

129

130

ISO 19011:2002 Guidelines for quality and/or environmental
management systems auditing has been revised by
ISO 19011:2011 Guidelines for auditing management systems

Vishwa Bandhu Pant

Noted

No action can be taken because comment is out of scope of 2019
Refinement.

9032

1

6

129

130

ISO/IEC 17020:1998 General criteria for the operation of various Vishwa Bandhu Pant
types of bodies performing inspection has been revised by
ISO/IEC 17020:2012 Conformity assessment -- Requirements forthe operation of various types of bodies performing inspection

Noted

No action can be taken because comment is out of scope of 2019
Refinement.

9034

1

6

129

130

Sector-specific applications of ISO 9001 - ISO/TS 29001:2010
Vishwa Bandhu Pant
Petroleum, petrochemical and natural gas industries -- Sectorspecific quality management systems -- Requirements for productand service supply organizations ( Note - This standard was last
reviewed and confirmed in 2014. Therefore this version remains
current ). This standard defines the quality management system forproduct and service supply organizations for the petroleum,
petrochemical and natural gas industries.
Comment: This stanandard may be added in BOX 6.2 of 6.5
QA/QC PLAN. This will facilitate the QA/QC of Petroleum,
petrochemical and natural gas industries .

Noted

No action can be taken because comment is out of scope of 2019
Refinement.

304

1

6

142

143

Fig. 3.2 Rhombus: Approach 1 and Approach 2 are mentioned,
explanation what does it mean is missing.

Noted

No action can be taken because comment is out of scope of 2019
Refinement.

305

1

6

150

156

Surprisingly the term "error" is ntroduced without any explanation. Milos Tichy"Random error" is probably missprint; "random uncertainty" isprobably ment. Error is comething wrong which is to be corrected,
somehow eqiovalent to bias.

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

Milos Tichy

Comment ID Volume Chapter
306
16From line To line
157
167

Comment
ExpertHard to understand, but probably a simple and obvious: errors are Milos Tichy
to be found and corrected.

Response
Accepted

Authors' note
The comment has been addressed in SOD.

310

1

6

179

205

All items mentioned are formulated as estimation of emission is a Milos Tichy
scientific problem, but comparativene of data from differnt
countrie requres keeping of the same guidelines more thanscientificalu based method. Moreover most of data are fromstatistical surveys (at least activity data) and ther a possible bias
can be avoided by an analisis of survey compelenes checked byrelative data (activity per capita), international comparison ofemission factors a time series.

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

307

1

6

179

180

Sentence "Improving the inclusiveness of the structural
assumptions chosen can reduce uncertainties." is hard tounderstand without any explanation.

Accepted withmodification

The sentence has been modified.

308

1

6

182

183

Sentence may be interpreted in differnt ways especially "as well as Milos Tichy
reductions in these causes of uncertainty."

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

309

1

6

184

191

The paragraph is to be divided into two because one can hardly
imagine CEMS in agriculture and forestry

Milos Tichy

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

311

1

6

206

209

It is necessary to note that using higher (more detailed) Tier may Milos Tichy
sometime lead to biased results because emission factors can be
wrong and activity not fully covered. Energy is an example:
summing activity per source may be less complete in comparisonof energy balance because it is evaluated by experienced people
who are using advance cross checks. As depicted in the following
picture higher Tier may produce less random uncertainty but may
contain a bias.

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

8622

1

6

213

222

need improvement

Amanullah Dr.

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

4408

1

6

254

255

Add adipic acid production with nitric acid production. Bothcontribute to N2O production. Adipic acid production may be
more important.

Kewei Yu

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

312

1

6

279

286

This part "defines" its own nomenclature different from the one
Milos Tichy
used in physical sciences. Uncertainty is mostly used for standard
deviation or variance and nor for the span of confidential interval.
The two formulas substantially differs, the only the second could
be used; multiplier 2.09 or 2.1 should be used. SE is usually called
standard deviation od the mean; "standard error" is misleading.
Preferably is to be rewriten including definitions or reference to a
glossary.

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

Milos Tichy

Comment ID Volume Chapter
788
1
6

From line To line
280
280

Comment
options

ExpertWilfried Winiwarter

Response
Accepted

Authors' note
The comment has been addressed in SOD.

313

1

6

287

330

This part is rather chaotic as it contains some well known items
expressed by different ways; recommendation: delete

Milos Tichy

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

522

1

6

295

295

It is written " ...as they may be are able to accommodate…"
instead of " … as they may be able to accommodate…"

Virginia Sena

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

790

1

6

295

295

… as they may accommodate …

Wilfried Winiwarter

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

1468

1

6

295

295

eliminate (are): …more reliable as they may be (are) able to …

Regine Röthlisberger

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

4792

1

6

295

295

"may be are able" should be "may be able"

Donna Giltrap

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

6392

1

6

295

295

as they may be are' needs clarification

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

7130

1

6

295

295

remove 'are'

Emmanuel Jonthan
Mpeta
Amanda Penistone

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

16

1

6

316

604

The chapter needs further editing to avoid parasite capital lettersand a mixture between British and US spelling

Frédéric Chevallier

Accepted

Revised, set to British.

9512

1

6

316

604

Current draft provides brief review of the recent efforts to augment Philip DeCola
the national inventory reporting with research results on nationalemission estimates of greenhouse gases based on atmosphericmeasurements. However, the number of references to research
publications is large and is likely to complicate understanding of
the text by inventory compilers. While the citations are necessaryand helpful to the community, it will be even more helpful with theaddition of a bit more explanation on what has been done and how.

Accepted

In revised draft, effort is made, whenever possible, to reduce
distraction to reader caused by referring to specialized literature.

9516

1

6

316

604

Since IPCC scoping meeting, that defined the extent of thePhilip DeColarefinementts, substantial progress was made in, for example, EU,
China, and other parts of the world towards establishing new largescale research programs (in EU: CHE, VERIFY) and deploymentof surface atmospheric observation networks (eg ICOS). This
progress provides opportunity of utilizing newly developed
expertise (such as reflecting recent progress in N2O emission
estimates) by involvement of research community as contributing
authors.

AcceptedContact with community is being strengthened by inviting
contributing authors.

Comment ID Volume Chapter
9520
1
6

From line To line
316
604

Comment
ExpertFor CO2, current draft focusses on the use of atmospheric
Philip DeColameasurements in relation to fossil fuel emissions. National andlocal scale atmospheric studies will be extremely useful forrefining inventory-based methods for AFOLU CO2 budgets which
may be based on limited data with large uncertainties. For
example, New Zealand is working towards national and local scaleatmospheric observations to refine pasture, managed forest andurban AFOLU CO2 budgets. The initial work is documented by
Steinkamp et al., 2017, although as noted above, inclusion ofreferences may be distracting.

Response
Accepted

Authors' note
Useful suggestion, pointing out that progress in AFOLU is being
actively sought dispite difficulties. In the case mentioned, they usedadvantage of a clean background CO2 in Southern Hemisphere.

9528

1

6

316

604

We suggest adding a reference to the Integrated Global
Philip DeCola
Greenhouse Gas Information System (IG3IS) Implementation Plan
(IP) which already is in a nearly final draft form and will be
published in the literature and in WMO report form prior to the
IPCC TFI 2019 refinementt deadline for literature references. The
link to the current IP draft is discoverable through the WMO IG3IS
web page : http://www.wmo.int/pages/prog/arep/gaw/ghg/IG3ISinfo.html and the new IG3IS web page will be made available toyour lead authors very soon and will be hosting the final draft andother valuable references and we will hope that a reference to thisweb page will also be in the 2019 refinementt.

Accepted

IG3IS plan reference currently points to WMO bulletin article,
reference updated after the IG3IS document was released.

9514

1

6

316

604

We understand that the authors do not have mandate to completely Philip DeColareplace 2016 Guidelines, but due to progress made in nationalemission estimates, the spirit of the section can be changed fromcautious introduction of available techniques to promoting the useof the emission estimates based on atmospheric observations
where it is technically justified and financially feasible.

Accepted withmodification

Numerous number of cases has been presented in the SOD using
the atmospheric observations for support of national inventory
reporting.

Comment ID Volume Chapter
9518
1
6

From line To line
316
604

Comment
ExpertWhile atmospheric measurement based approaches are indeed not Philip DeCola
for free, neither is any other enterprise, such as collecting data forbuilding inventories from activity data and emission factors. A key
point that needs to be made is that many "developed" countries
such as France, Germany, Netherlands, USA, Japan, Korea andothers already have in place a large number of high quality
atmospheric measurement stations as well as the skilled people
who know how to interpret and analyze the measurements for the
resulting benefit toward improved emission estimates, yet therelationships between the research and inventory building andreporting agencies do not exist yet and need to be encouraged. The
UK and Swiss are the two best examples to date (Australia also but
to a more limited extent) in countries like France, Netherlands, andothers where the measurements and the inverse modeling expertise
already exists all that is left is to build the relationships and thetrust and partnerships to yield the added value to the inventorybuilding and reporting agencies. The big investments have alreadybeen made and it is wasteful not to take advantage of this. IPCCTFI could help by making such a statement in this report. Also,
please note that the UNFCCC SBSTA language from COP23 has
made such a statement in Agenda Item 8 Sub-item 12 and its
footnote, see at link:
http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2017/sbsta/eng/l21.pdf Also, indeveloping countries with limited data collection capabilities for
IPCC TFI activity data and emission factor based approaches baseline knowledge on national totals may be available from analysis of
atmospheric measurements already available from satellite
measurements and deploying low-cost sensor networks throughcapacity building.

Response
Accepted withmodification

Authors' note
Agree with first part, available measurements should be usedefficiently for support of QC/QA. This concurs with othercomments encouraging better use of observations, and the draft as
whole makes effort to accommodate best those comments. New
paragraph on Collaboration was added.

4810

1

6

318

604

There are a number of references to the approach taken by
Australia in the verification of HFC emissions using atmosphericobservations and inverse modelling in its inventory (in particular,
the examples provided in table 6.2). The authors may like toconsider further work undertaken by Australia which will be
included in the next inventory submission in relation to the use of
inverse modelling to make adjustments to annual SF6 EFs fromelectricity supply and distribution. The supporting document
provides more details of the approach undertaken.

Mark Hunstone

Accepted

Mention of SF6 emission estimates in Australia added to Table 6.2.

9506

1

6

318

319

Consider rephrasing title to say ".....emission estimates including
the use of atmospheric concentration measurements" because inmost cases the estimates are not derived solely with atmosphericconcentration measurements but also include good priorknowledge based on activity data and emission factors.

Philip DeCola

Accepted withmodification

Good suggestion, but to keep the title both brief and informative,
modified as "INTRODUCTION TO EMISSION ESTIMATESBASED ON ATMOSPHERIC CONCENTRATIONMEASUREMENTS".

Comment ID Volume Chapter
5948
1
6

From line To line
320
320

Comment
Change the sentence from … the state of science and its
applications to estimating national emissions to … the state ofscience for atmospheric measurements and their application to
verifying national emissions.

17

1

6

325

Response
Accepted

Authors' note
Corrected as suggested.

"labor-intensive" is not a proper explanation. Reasons are mainly Frédéric Chevallier
1/ systematic errors in all models and in some of themeasurements, 2/ the difficulty to separate between an
administrative area and the surrounding areas with atmosphericmeasurements, and 3/ the difficulty to separate between flux types(e.g., between LULUCF and other vegetation fluxes).

Noted

Cost and labour-intensive mentioned here refers to running
operationally a whole system, including observational program,producing gridded inventory and modelling. This text has
nevertheless been removed and emphasis of the paragraph is now
on methodology than on the administrative process to run themodels. This is important given that the Inventory compilers do nothave to run the models that generate verification estimates.

5596

1

6

325

In many cases…

Stefan Reimann

Noted

Clarified the statement mentioning difficulties that obstructpractical application of the atmospheric measurements in many
countries.

5598

1

6

325

This statement is somehow contradictory to the following section
starting with “nevertheless,…

Stefan Reimann

Accepted

Clarified the statement mentioning difficulties that obstructpractical application of the atmospheric measurements in many
countries.

5600

1

6

325

Stefan Reimann

Accepted withmodification

The sentence is modified from 'many cases' to 'some cases', toreflect reality.

9510

1

6

328

328

I would suggest that this sentence starting with “in many cases…
is deleted. Methods have been improved a lot in the last decadeand then they can be used (with a hopefully improving quality) in
the future (for which this guideline is written.
The word "verification" needs to be defined. There use ofverification to some readers implies that there is a truth or a
version of truth that is being used to "verify" an estimate.
Advances in the use of atmospheric measurements in many cases
has shown great value in helping to better constrain emission
estimates by adding a new constraint to the fundamental use ofactivity data and emission factors and can help to fine tune or
reduce uncertainty and/or adjust emission factors, and emission
totals for national totals and in some cases for sectors.

Philip DeCola

Accepted

Good suggestion to separate verification and improvement, toextend utility of atmospheric observation from verification to
improvements in inventory.

3752

1

6

329

330

It is suggested to use a more general language. The reason being
Guenther Schmidt
that it is primarily the task of those experts with specific modellingand measuring skills that are in a position to use inverse modellingfor verification as already indicated in the paragraph above. Suchwording might be: ... and thus it may be considered to takeadvantage of this form of verification.

Accepted withmodification

Right suggestion to use wording as 'form of verification', butsentence has been revised, and it is not easy to fit 'form ofverification' now.

4410

1

6

333

339

GHG, define before use.

Accepted

Corrected.

325

ExpertVincent Camobreco

Kewei Yu

Comment ID Volume Chapter
9526
1
6

From line To line
333
333

Comment
Expert
The word "independent" needs clarification and perhaps even
Philip DeCola
being replaced with other words. Of course the atmosphericmeasurements are independent from the data used to determnine
activity data for inventory building, but they are both intimately apart of most inverse model analsyses as described in 6.10.2. So theword "independent" in this context is a bit misleading. If our goal
is to encourage those who are able to do so from a resourse andskill perspective to use all available statistical activity data andatmosperic measurements for the most complete and useful
constraints on emission inventories, then we should find otherways of describing then "independent" or just use more words to
be clear.

Response
Accepted withmodification

Authors' note
In the current text, the issue is addressed by saying "largely
independent from inventories", so hopefully the understanding isthat full independence is not assumed.

5602

1

6

339

long-term monitoring sites

Stefan Reimann

Accepted

Added 'long-term' to text.

5950

1

6

339

343

The beginning of this paragraph briefly outlines atmosphericmeasurement and inverse modeling approach, should it also
include a mention that assumed baseline (gridded) emission
estimates are also needed

Vincent Camobreco

Accepted

Added "gridded emission inventory" to the sentence.

18

1

6

342

342

"with an atmospheric transport model" ... and with some priorinformation. Or the reader cannot understand what is said in thefollowing page.

Frédéric Chevallier

Accepted

Added "gridded emission inventory" to the list of ingredients.

4862

1

6

343

343

Is it normal to use 'We' in IPCC inventory guidelines?

Elsa Hatanaka

Accepted

Corrected to harmonize with rest of the 2019 Refinement.

5604

1

6

345

better: atmospheric transport from country to country

Stefan Reimann

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

5952

1

6

348

348

Accepted

Revised as suggested.

9530

1

6

348

348

Accepted withmodification

Revised by adding "complemented by observations of isotopic
ratios, atmospheric potential oxygen (APO), and covarying tracers,
such as carbon monoxide".

3754

1

6

354

354

The following language is suggested in order to avoid that scarce Guenther Schmidt
resources from inventory compilers are stranded in such excercise:
Despite the availability of inverse modelling tools, specialized
experts are required to apply them

Accepted withmodification

Revised by adding 'It should be noted that, despite the availabilityof inverse modelling tools, experienced modelers are required toapply them'.

5606

1

6

358

at the end of the section it would be an ideal place to say that
Stefan Reimann
continuous verification systems already exist in UK and
Switzerland, where emission inventories are verified annually andnumbers are reported in the National Inventory Report (NIR) to the
UNFCCC. A further system is also in place in Australia, however,data are not reported annually.

Accepted

Revised.

Change sentence … more dense observation networks in future … Vincent Camobreco
to … more dense observation networks in the future …
it is not just more dense observations but should also mention
Philip DeCola"more measurements of isotopic species and the better use ofcovarying species such as CO and others."

Comment ID Volume Chapter
6724
1
6

From line To line
359
363

Comment
Provide more information about the use of basin- and site-levelmeasurements for verification. For example, Zavala-Araiza et al2015 and Zavala-Araiza et al 2017 found agreement between
Barnett Shale emission estimates based on basin-level and sitelevel data, but report that well pad emission rates based on sitelevel measurements were 50% higher than modeled, componentlevel emissions, which indidates that the traditional, componentlevel inventory appraoch was underestimating emissions. Similar
approaches could be used to adjust emission inventories based on
empirical site- or basin-level data.

9532

1

6

359

363

2404

1

6

362

19

1

6

4342

1

4864

1

ExpertDavid Lyon

Response
Accepted withmodification

Authors' note
A study by Zavala-Araiza et al. 2015 in suggested context was
mentioned in other part (see Line 362 in FOD).

We suggest adding references to city-scale examples from LA,
Philip DeCola
Paris, Indianapolis and other city examples. Also examples of nonInverse modeling uses of atmospheric measurements (direct
detection) such as mass-balance airborne measurements should be
mentioned. See references in Section 4 on City-Scale GHG
monitoring in the IG3IS Implementation Plan as well as thesepotential references (but there may be other better ones to bereferenced in the IG3IS IP)
https://collections.elementascience.org/quantification-of-urbangreenhouse-gas-emissions/ and https://www.atmos-chemphys.net/17/8313/2017/ and https://www.atmos-chemphys.net/15/1707/2015/acp-15-1707-2015.pdf

Noted

No action can be taken because comment is out of scope of 2019
Refinement.

363

Please add more recent studies- Schweitzke et al (2017), Vaughn
et al. (2017), Zimmerle et al. (2017), Bell et al. (2017)

Accepted withmodification

Suggested references rely more on facility scale measurements
rather than larger scale.

363

363

The sentence highlights updating emission factors, but this topic Frédéric Chevallier
does not seem to be directly addressed in two of the cited
publications (McKain et al. 2015, Viatte et al 2017). Referring toYver-Kwok et al (2015, doi:10.5194/amt-8-2853-2015) would be
more appropriate (and fairer). If the intend of the sentence is moregeneral, the phrasing could be improved and non-US references, inaddition to Yver-Kwok et al could be usefully added (e.g., Breon etal., 2015, doi:10.5194/acp-15-1707-2015).

Accepted

Revised to reflect suggestion.

6

363

363

I suggest that the authors add a figure for the outline of inverse
Naofumi Kosaka
modelling. As readers may be unfamiliar with inverse modelling,
the addition will facilitate the readers' further understanding towardit.

Accepted withmodification

Text has been modified to make it easy for readers to understandthe basic principles of inverse modelling.

6

364

364

Should this section rather be named as 'Elements needed for GHG Elsa Hatanaka
Emission Inventory Verification Using AtmosphericMeasurements'? It is hard to understand as is.

Accepted

Revised to 'components needed'.

Fiji George

Comment ID Volume Chapter
9524
1
6

From line To line
364
393

Comment
Expert
The atmospheric measurement section 6.10.2.2, as well as thePhilip DeColaoverall section 6.10.2, is strongly focused on atmospheric
inversion methodologies, rightly recognizing that atmospheric
inversions are complex and require specialized skills. Yet
atmospheric measurements alone (without complex modelling) canbe extremely useful in evaluating and refining inventory methods,
particularly for non-CO2 gases. For example, emission rates at theregional and urban scales for a host of non-CO2 gases can be
determined from the ratio of fossil fuel CO2 to each gas at thatlocation (Miller et al., 2012, Turnbull et al., 2011) as well as otherreferences such as the work of Zavala et al, PNAS 2015
December, 112 (51) 15597 15602.
https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1522126112

Response
Noted

Authors' note
Omission of the tracer correlation approach is rightfully pointed
out. However, this section deals with national scale, while proposed
references are referring to sub-national scale estimates, thus
alternative references for Swiss and Australia national estimates fit
better here. No change was made in the SOD text.

4412

1

6

370

Atmospheric, letter caseAccepted

Corrected.

20

1

6

371

372

Why would the guidelines restrict inverse modelling to
Frédéric Chevallier"established networks of GHG monitoring stations" ? It seems
counter-productive to exclude new independent initiatives, as longas they meet high quality standards for the current purpose.

Accepted

Reworded.

314

1

6

371

372

The statement about correlation "If correlations exist, then either Milos Tichy
the correlation can be included explicitly or data can be aggregatedto an appropriate level such that correlations become lessimportant. " is not true. If correlations exist other approaches
should be used. One can hardly imagine that correlations may
disappear when the data are aggregated.

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

21

1

6

373

373

"calibration correction against international standards" is a bonus
but not a requirement. The assimilated data need to be wellintercalibrated with each other, but it does not matter for the
purpose of inventory QA if there is an unknown offset with other(unassimilated) data.

Noted

Current practice involves using data from several national
networks, that need to be intercalibrated.

22

1

6

373

374

"submission to global databases such as WDCGG" is not a
Frédéric Chevallier
requirement for inventory QA. The text is very confusing here.
Basically, it imposes that the (costly) data is made freely accessible
to all, which implies a specific, debatable, economic model.

Accepted withmodification

The text has been changed and language smoothed to make clearthat this is not a requirement.

23

1

6

377

378

Are the specifications established for climate purpose by GAW
and AGAGE fit for inventory QA? We could think that some ofthem can be relaxed to some extent (see the discussion in Wu etal., 2016, doi:10.5194/acp-16-7743-2016).

Rejected

As there are no specific guidelines proven in applications on towhat extent the requirements can be relaxed, it is better to refer toregular practice. No change was made in the text.

Kewei Yu

Frédéric Chevallier

Frédéric Chevallier

Comment ID Volume Chapter
5880
1
6

From line To line
379

Comment
Expert
For the paragraph starting on line 379, there could be some more Vincent Camobreco
information on the potential of satellite retrievals as there are somefeatures that aren’t there for in-situ observations. Most notably,satellite observations provide globally consistent coverage and thedata are freely available taking away the need to setup your own
network. Future instruments will provide orders of magnitude
more data than currently available. One example could be
TROPOMI, which already launched.

Response
Accepted

Authors' note
Added mention of TROPOMI.

6114

383

(adding the following sentence after "planned for carbon dioxide.") Akihiko Kuze

Accepted withmodification

Turner et al., 2015 is already cited in line 383, 462. The
corresponding product covering fixed time period is available fromNASA site, but NASA does not reveal a plan to continue its
production, so it is of limited value for emission verification in long
term.

1

6

383

The study by Turner used the data from GOSAT wihch waslaunched in 2009 by JAXA. The data is open and free and various
data sets are available at JAXA, NASA, NIES websites.

7164

1

6

383

383

Add info or reference on availabity of and developments to date on Masami Onoda
global GHG datasets and research using GOSAT.

Accepted withmodification

A reference to a review by Matsunaga et al. 2018, which is more
focused on emission estimates using GHG observation from Spacehas been included.

24

1

6

384

384

"backed by participation of the modelling community". Who is the Frédéric Chevallier
modelling community? This requirement may be read as a attemptfrom a few scientists to keep control on what happens in their
domain. A more constructive requirement would be that the work
presentation is detailed enough so that it can be reviewed. For this,a detailed description of the inversion set-up needs to be available(atmospheric transport model, uncertainty model for the priorfluxes and for the measurements, including cross-correlated
terms). The prior and posterior misfits to measurements (notnecessarily the measurements themselves, if they are confidential)
also need to be available.

Accepted

Revised to "by participation of the expert inverse model users anddevelopers".

4414

1

6

384

Modelling or Modeling, letter case? Other places

Accepted

Corrected to lowercase, converted to modelling in other places too.

5882

1

6

384

1

6

385

Accepted withmodification
Accepted

Reference to GEOS-Chem added as Henze et al. 2007.

25

For the paragraph starting on line 384, discussion of models should Vincent Camobreco
include GEOS-Chem and it’s adjoint (from Wecht et al. [2014])
The PYVAR inversion framework (Chevallier et al. 2005,
Frédéric Chevallier
doi:10.1029/2005JD006390) can be added. It is distributed freely
on simple request to LSCE.

386

Kewei Yu

Reference added.

Comment ID Volume Chapter
315
1
6

From line To line
388
389

Comment
ExpertSentemce "Uncertainty of the inputs will represent a 95 percent
Milos Tichy
confidence interval expressed as a percentage of the central
estimate of the input (e.g. ± 20%)." is hard to be understood andcan be interpreted in different ways. Concept of dependent
variable i.e. correlated variables is not explained (it is not obvious).

Response
Accepted

Authors' note
The comment has been addressed in SOD.

5884

1

6

388

For the paragraph starting on line 388, recommend including a
Vincent Camobreco
statement on how using a poor prior inventory can bias the inverse
modeling results. It currently only mentions EDGAR may not be
up-to-date, that’s not the main issue. As the atmospheric data only
gives information on the total methane flux, errors in the priordistribution of the different source types can lead to a wrong
interpretation of inversion results. For example, work over the US
has showed that the interpretation of inversions using the EDGAR
inventory has been biased by the errors in spatial patterns in oil/gas
emissions (Maasakkers et al., 2017). Prior errors could also lead toerrors in the attribution between anthropogenic and naturalemissions.

Accepted

Revised to show difference. Dependence on prior inventory is
checked by applying sensitivity tests in multiple studies.

6726

1

6

388

393

Elaborate on how gridded inventories can be used for verification. David Lyon
For example, Barkley et al 2017 used the Maasakkers et al 2016
gridded US EPA inventory as a prior in their inverse modeling of
NE Pennsylvania O&G methane emissions.

Accepted withmodification

Use of the gridded inventory in inversion is elaborated in otherparts of the text, here the focus is on gridded inventory itself.

5954

1

6

389

391

Clarify this discussion do references refer to different types ofgridded emissions?

Vincent Camobreco

Accepted

Clarified.

26

1

6

391

393

The role of EDGAR here is not clear and not well introduced. This Frédéric Chevallier
should be rephrased in a more pedagogical way.

Accepted

Revised EDGAR part.

2406

1

6

393

Consider adding the Conley et al. technique for verification.
Fiji George
Conley et al employs Gausian Theorem and has been successfully
employed in the US

Accepted withmodification

Conley et al., 2017 applied more advanced type of mass-balance
type approach, which has been already mentioned, as ZavalaAraiza, 2015 provided a comprehensive report on multiple massbalance studies. Reference added anyway.

4866

1

6

394

394

Elsa Hatanaka

Accepted

Revised.

5886

1

6

398

398

A title such as 'Examples of emission estimates' would suit thissection better.
I think that it is not just the emission factors but also capturing all
emitting processes and activity data. Inverse modeling can help
indicate these gaps as it quantifies total emissions.

Vincent Camobreco

Accepted

Revised.

5608

1

6

400

For Switzerland Henne et al., 2015 could be mentioned

Stefan Reimann

Henne et al., 2016 cited further in Table 6.2.

8624

1

6

407

move carbon dioxide to next page

Amanullah Dr.

Accepted withmodification
Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

Comment ID Volume Chapter
1780
1
6

From line To line
408
408

27

1

6

409

409

6394

1

6

409

409

8626

1

6

413

5956

1

6

414

414

792

1

6

423

6396

1

6

434

6398

1

6

440

440

28

1

6

440

441

316

1

6

445

9884

1

6

6400

1

4868

1

Comment
Uncertainties of "inventory estimates of" anthropogenic emissions
of…..
Please add Breon et al. (2015, doi:10.5194/acp-15-1707-2015) toavoid a bias towards US studies.
et al, 2016' replace with 'et al.,'ExpertMelissa Weitz

Response
Accepted

Authors' note
Revised.

Frédéric Chevallier

Accepted

Revised.

Emmanuel Jonthan
Mpeta
Amanullah Dr.

Accepted

Corrected.

Accepted

Corrected.

Accepted

Corrected.

423

Change sentence … concentration data and inverse and an
Vincent Camobreco
inventory … to … concentration data and inverse modeling and an
inventory …
(see Box 6.3)
Wilfried Winiwarter

Accepted

Corrected.

434

et al.' replace with et al.,'Emmanuel Jonthan
Mpeta
et al.' replace with et al.,'Emmanuel Jonthan
Mpeta
Fortems-Cheiney et al. (2012, doi:10.1002/jgrd.50544) for HCFC- Frédéric Chevallier
22 and Fortems-Cheiney et al. (2015, doi:10.1002/2015JD023741)
for HFC-134a should be added. They have presented corrections toinventory estimates for USA, Europe, Japan and China.

Accepted

Corrected.

Accepted

Corrected.

Rejected

Proposed references point to studies made with global model,
operating at lower resolution, than typically used for nationalemission estimates. More detailed analysis of the study results isneeded. No change was made in the text.

447

Repetition of previous statement in lines 393-397; delete.

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

445

446

Inaccurate text - needs revision. Suggest: "Inverse modelling toDavid Glenestimate UK emissions of HFC-134a (see Box 6.5) indicated a
Thistlethwaite
discrepancy when compared to national inventory estimates, andthis evidence prompted a review of the assumptions applied
within the UK inventory estimation model as part of the national
inventory improvement plan." I also note that a further example ofgood practice could be added here, as the UK inventory andinverse modelling team have worked together historically to
improve the calibration of the INTEM model, through thecollection of more temporally resolved emission estimates(especially for N2O emissions from NA and AA production plantin the UK). This is especially useful where a small number of
installations are high emitters of a given GHG, and the access togood quality spatial and temporal data enables the verification
modelling to be significantly improved through better calibration.

Accepted

Revised, added the text on good practice to section 6.10.2.2.

6

449

452

Sentence not complete

Accepted

Revised.

6

450

451

Does the 'emission inventory' referred to here mean the inventory
used to validate the atmospheric monitoring, and not the GHG
emission inventory? If so, this could be clarified.

Accepted

Revised.

ciation is wrong no need of comma before brackets, please

Milos Tichy

Emmanuel Jonthan
Mpeta
Elsa Hatanaka

Comment ID Volume Chapter
317
16

From line To line
455
456

Comment
Sentence "Approach 1 has limitations to the consideration ofcorrelation as it only allows for full correlation or independency
between the variables." is in contradiction with the previous text.

ExpertMilos Tichy

Response
Accepted

Authors' note
The comment has been addressed in SOD.

8628

1

6

455

ciation is wrong no need of comma before brackets, please

Amanullah Dr.

Accepted

Revised.

524

1

6

456

457

Table 6.1. Row CO2 City-scale. Column Strengths/ Successes:
Number "2" corresponding to the footnote 2 is not showed assuperscript.

Virginia Sena

Accepted

Revised.

526

1

6

456

457

Table 6.1. Row CH4. Column Future Development/ Possibilities:
it is written "Reginal" instead of "Regional".

Virginia Sena

Accepted

Revised.

1470

1

6

456

457

HFCs verification based on atmospheric measurements is also
Regine Röthlisberger
reported for Switzerland, although with a simplified approach, nota full inversion. (see National Inventory Report, Annex 5.1)

Accepted

Revised.

5610

1

6

456

CH (Switzerland) also reports HFC emissions (as UK andAustralia)

Accepted

Revised.

9534

1

6

456

456

The focus is not on natural but on total fossil fuel and natural
Philip DeColafluxes, due to the limited ability to use measurements to separate
the two. More isotopic (radiocarbon) and atmospheric potential
oxygen (APO) measurements and analyses are needed to be able toseparate natural from fossil fuel CO2 emissions.

Accepted

Revised.

9886

1

6

456

457

The entry in table 6.1 for the UK HFC "strengths" column isDavid Glen
misleading and should be revised. The UK model was recalibrated Thistlethwaite
there was not an EF "correction". Suggest the text be changed to"Revised EF" or "Recalibration of national model".

Accepted

Revised.

29

1

6

456

456

For coherence, the row about HFCs should have a footnote withproper references.

Frédéric Chevallier

Accepted withmodification

Footnote added, pointing to section 6.10.2.2 for text.

30

1

6

456

456

Please add Breon et al. (2015, doi:10.5194/acp-15-1707-2015) in Frédéric Chevallier
footnote 2. Also note that the "2" in the table should besuperscripted.

Accepted withmodification

Referred to more recent paper by Staufer et al., 2017 (in samegroup).

Stefan Reimann

Comment ID Volume Chapter
1782
1
6

From line To line
456
457

Comment
ExpertI would not characterize Miller et al. as a success for U.S. emission Melissa Weitz
estimates of CH4, but instead something that highlights importantconsiderations for using atmospheric measurements to comparewith national GHG inventory estimates. The Miller et al. work
compared to the EDGAR mapping of CH4 in the U.S., and foundthat livestock emissions are underestimated. However, when the
U.S. methane emissions were mapped based on the GHG
Inventory report, results were different. Using the Miller et al.
results to update the US GHG inventory would not have improved
estimates. Please see Maasakkers et al.
http://pubs.acs.org/doi/full/10.1021/acs.est.6b02878.

Response
Accepted withmodification

Authors' note
Agree that Miller et al., 2013 revealed a number of problems,
without fixing them. Moved references to point to section 6.10.2.2
to avoid duplication of citations.

1784

1

6

456

457

There is no citation for national emissions estimates for U.S. forN2O and HFCs.

Accepted withmodification

Citations available in section 6.10.2.2, footnote modified.

9046

1

6

458

479

Although it is more challenging than CH4, CO2 emission
Tsuneo Matsunaga
estimates using satellite data such as GOSAT and OCO-2 havebeen conducted. Such activities should be clearly mentioned in thissection.

Accepted

Mention of CO2 studies added.

9166

1

6

458

479

It should be mentioned thay Japan, US, China, and Europe haveshort-term and long-term plans for GHG satellite observation andthe satellite data continuity is becoming secure.

Accepted withmodification

New missions are mentioned.

318

1

6

460

482

To quantify uncertainty of trend is a quite complicated task due to Milos Tichy
correlations and non-linearity in formulas which are unavoidable
and and cannot be quantified by a simplified way as Approach 1
for uncertainties of emissions. Moreove mentioned sensitivities A
abd B mentioned are hard to understand and of unclear use.
Recommendation: delete the whole part.

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

7166

1

6

460

479

May add use of satellite data e.g.GOSAT for CO2 verification,
especially in localized target areas. (or under section 6.10.2.3)

Accepted

Mention of CO2 studies added.

5888

1

6

460

Accepted withmodification

Added text separating analytical inversion from hot spot data
analysis.

Melissa Weitz

Tsuneo Matsunaga

Masami Onoda

For the paragraph starting on line 460, it may be useful to describe Vincent Camobreco
a full analytical inversion framework as well, in addition to the hot
spot and linear regression method.

Comment ID Volume Chapter
96
1
6

From line To line
461
479

Comment
OCO-2 has a high spatial resolution of 1.29 km 9 2.25 km so thatit can be a feasible alternative for monitoring local target. It
becomes possible to observe the amount of carbon emission fromdowntown facilities such as buildings and trafﬁc facilities that
could be identiﬁed in a high resolution of 1 km or less.
UAV (Unmanned Aerial Vehicle) data can realistically measurecarbon density at the level of almost field-survey standpoint.

ExpertJung-Sup Um

Response
Accepted

Authors' note
Mention of OCO-2 and work by (Nassar et al. 2017) added.

1786

1

6

461

461

Consider adding a description of GOSAT.

Melissa Weitz

8504

1

6

461

461

(adding the following senteces before "Satellite observations by
GOSAT … ")Osamu Ochiai

Accepted withmodification
Accepted withmodification

Revised, review by Matsunaga et al. 2018 has been mentioned in
the SOD.
Mentioned review by Matsunaga et al. 2018.

Accepted

Corrected.

Multiple GHG observing satellites are currently on orbit inoperation. Their coverage extended to whole globe and temporal
resolution is also improved since the world first satellite dedicatedto GHG monitoring, GOSAT was launched in 2009. GOSAT
covers whole globe by 54,000 obsrvatoin points every 3 days.
GHG obsrvation from space has been advanced since the previous
guidelines in 2006.

8630

1

6

462

ciation is wrong no need of comma before brackets, please

Amanullah Dr.

9044

1

6

472

Accepted

Reference and URL have been included at final copy-editing stage.

31

1

6

474

476

(Matsunaga et al. 2018) is not listed in References. As it is a web Tsuneo Matsunaga(online) document, its URL(http://www.nies.go.jp/soc/en/documents/guidebook/) should be
included in References.
"can be estimated using a simple regression model" is misleading. Frédéric Chevallier
The prospects are good, but it would be misleading to write that
we are there yet.

Accepted(Janardanan et al. 2016) did use a regression to fit model toobservations. Revised to avoid [false] impression of simplicity.

4870

1

6

475

475

Is it 'large regions 'in' like the US or temperate Asia' instead of'large regions like the US or temperate Asia' ?

Accepted

One study cite used such large regions, other, more recent ones,
target even smaller regions, e.g. in US.

Elsa Hatanaka

Comment ID Volume Chapter
6728
1
6

From line To line
477
479

Comment
ExpertIn reference to “With the expected availability of methaneDavid Lyon
observations from new satellite sensors, the problem ofobservation numbers will be relaxed, and national scale emission
estimates by hot-spot emission data analysis are expected to
become possible", the former part of the sentence is vague. We
suggest rephrasing to:"With the expected availability of increased methane observationsin space-time". Specify some new/upcoming satellite missionse.g. TROPOMI, GOSAT-2, GeoCARB). Recent and near-future
global polar orbiting satellites (e.g. TROPOMI, GOSAT-2) havecoarse spatial resolution of the order 50-100 km2 pixel resolution.
A significant fraction of these relatively coarse pixels will be
subject to cloud contamination, leading to a reduced sample size
across both space and time. Thus, there is a need to have finer
resolution satellite sensors, which would helping in enhancing therobustness of national-scale emission estimates.

Response
Accepted

Authors' note
Revised.

1788

1

6

478

479

It is not immediately apparent how national scale emission
estimates by hot-spot emissions data analysis will be possible.
Please elaborate.

Melissa Weitz

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

9522

1

6

480

492

The section GLOBAL TRENDS, ISOTOPIC COMPOSITION,
Philip DeCola
AND TRACER CORRELATIONS omits any mention ofradiocarbon (14C) measurements which provide a direct constraintof recently added fossil fuel CO2. These measurements allow
partitioning into fossil fuel and biogenic fluxes that can be, at the
local scale, used to evaluate AFOLU CO2. Likewise, there shouldbe mention of the use of atmospheric potential oxygen (APO)
measurements and analyses for these purposes. Correlations
between enhancements in halocarbons and enhancements in CO
are also used in the Swiss inventory report.

Accepted

Added 14C and APO to urban scale part.

1790

1

6

482

492

Cite new work on fires and Ch4 trends?
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-017-022460.pdf?origin=ppub

Melissa Weitz

Rejected

Global trends are important part of science but loosely connected tonational inventory, so the discussion would look too technical.

5890

1

6

487

This paragraph should probably address the uncertainties in theisotopic methods and the influence of the global sink as pointed
out by Turner et al. (2017).

Vincent Camobreco

Rejected

Global trends are important part of science but loosely connected tonational inventory, so the discussion would look too technical.

Comment ID Volume Chapter
32
1
6From line To line
491
491

Comment
ExpertSome or all of these correlations may actually depend on some
Frédéric Chevallier
variables (e.g., atmospheric temperature or technology factors) inan unknown way. See the analysis of measurements made in Paris,
France, by Ammoura et al. (2014, doi:10.5194/acp-14-128712014) and Ammoura et al. (2016, doi:10.5194/acp-16-156532016).

Response
Accepted

Authors' note
To date, correlations were applied to tracers not affected bycomplicated processes. We have included text in the SOD tohighlight such circumstances .

794

1

6

511

513

Inverse modelling is a very useful technique, good that it finds
Wilfried Winiwarterroom here. However very few countries will be able to organize
this themselves, and the overall weight it gets (by sheer length)
seems out of proportion. Recommendation: move much of thematerial to an annex. As a minimum change, it would be
worthwhile to acknowledge the benefits of centralized approaches
as follows in the text of lines 511-513: "With several working
examples (Manning …) of inverse modelling used for national
reports, still the use of data products (global inverse models will beable to break down results and make them accessible to individual
countries) in general may be the method of choice. If however a
country is able to develop their own inverse model, they may takeadvantage of existing approaches. Several key steps ..."

Accepted withmodification

Accepted suggestion on mention available alternatives, but decided
to keep the subsection text in main body, to maintaining the text
integrity.

33

1

6

515

515

The coverage should be sufficient for the sources within the
country, rather than for the country as a whole.

Accepted

Revised.

9536

1

6

529

574

We strongly suggest that another call out box such as this one isPhilip DeColadeveloped for the Swiss methane example of Henne et al. and thatboth this UK box and the Swiss box to be developed discuss therelationship between the inventory agencies and the inverse
modeling agencies. In countries like France, Netherlands, andothers where the measurements and the inverse modeling expertise
already exists all that is left is to build the relationships and thetrust and partnerships to yield the added value to the inventorybuilding and reporting agencies. The big investments have alreadybeen made and it is wasteful not to take advantage of this. IPCCTFI could help by making such a statement in this report. Also,
please note that the UNFCCC SBSTA language from COP23 has
made such a statement in Agenda Item 8 Sub-item 12 and its
footnote, see at link:
http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2017/sbsta/eng/l21.pdf

Accepted withmodification

Added a paragraph on Collaboration between inverse modelers andinventory compilers in section 6.10.2.2. A box with a Swiss
example was added.

7132

1

6

532

532

Replace 'The UK's government' with 'the UK government's'

Amanda Penistone

Accepted

Revised.

7134

1

6

535

535

The UK' instead of 'UK'

Amanda Penistone

Accepted

Revised.

796

1

6

537

537

(replaced by Bilsdale …

Wilfried Winiwarter

Accepted

Revised.

7136

1

6

537

537

Remove 'to'

Amanda Penistone

Accepted

Revised.

Frédéric Chevallier

Comment ID Volume Chapter
9888
1
6

From line To line
558
559

Comment
Expert
The text in box 6.3 is a useful example but this wording goes far David Glen
beyond the role of a guidance manual and the assertion regarding Thistlethwaite
UK not achieving its Kyoto commitment by the same amount asestimated in the inventory does not present a balanced view given
the large uncertainties in the inverse modelling. This statement is
not needed - the point that the inverse modelling does nto present
the same trend has already been made. Also note that the UK NIR
presents the up to date situatioan annually - these statements of acomparison at one point in time should not be established into a
guidance document. The guidance should be timeless text.

Response
Accepted

Authors' note
Text was revised, updated based on UK 2016 NIR, added notice ofbeing year and country specific.

9538

1

6

563

565

The description of the comparison needs to be changed for
accuracy. The inverse modeling result for methane is flat from1990 till today and the early years are 3 year averages due tolimitation of one measurement site and are one year averages inmore recent years with more measurement sites. The error bars
(uncertainty) are not the issue of not showing a downward trend.
They show no trend within their uncertainty and the inventory
converges to this value over time. Please correct the explanation.

Philip DeCola

Accepted

Revised, removed notice of the trend mismatch.

9890

1

6

569

573

Again the guidance text is going far beyond its remit here andDavid Glen
making statements that infer errors in the UK inventory. In no way Thistlethwaite
should this be cited in a guidance document. The text "assessmentof missing / under-represented sources" and the two bullet points
that follow should be deleted. Replace with more generic text thatstates that these differences in the modelling versus inventory data
are reflected in the UK inventory uncertainty assessment, andcontributes to the UK inventory improvement programme byescalating review of current UK methane emission estimates.

Accepted

Revised, updated based on UK 2016 NIR.

7138

1

6

571

572

To avoid this report being out of date before it is released, pleaserefer to the UK's 2018 inventory when this is available in spring
2018

Amanda Penistone

Accepted withmodification

Revised, updated based on UK 2016 NIR, submitted in 2018

4872

1

6

575

577

A title name such as 'Criteria for Applying Inverse Model
Estimates for Comparison with National Inventories' would be
more simple.

Elsa Hatanaka

Accepted

Revised.

4422

1

6

583

Three-Four, letter case.

Kewei Yu

Accepted

Revised.

7140

1

6

583

it's not clear what 'Three-Four' means - this could be 'Three tofour', 'Three - four' or 'Three/four'

Amanda Penistone

Accepted

Revised.

583

Comment ID Volume Chapter
34
1
6

From line To line
584
585

Comment
ExpertNational-scale inverse modelling cannot be made with a single site Frédéric Chevallier(to a useful precision). There needs to be a way to distinguish whatcomes from the rest of the world from what comes from within:
we need at least two sites.

Response
Noted

Authors' note
In practice, this limitation is relaxed due to change in winddirection, there are days whereby the site sees the country's
emissions and other days what comes from outside world (in Cape
Grim, for Australia or Jungfraujoch for Switzerland). The main
reason for using just one site is that maintaining sophisticated insitu
continuous halocarbon observations is difficult. Text remains
unchanged.

5612

1

6

585

UK and Switzerland

Stefan Reimann

Accepted

Revised.

798

1

6

588

588

… or lower than those of the the GHG inventory.

Wilfried Winiwarter

Accepted

Revised.

4874

1

6

588

592

Having the sentence 'For example, high emission inventory
Elsa Hatanaka
uncertainty is known for HFC emissions and many other fugitive
emissions, while uncertainty of carbon dioxide emissions from fueluse is low.' between line 588 and line 590-592 obscures the point
trying to be made, because it mentions the case of high uncertainty(HFC emissions) first. It might work better to put it behind lines
590-592.

Accepted withmodification

Text has been revised taking into account the comment.

1792

1

6

603

604

Would be helpful here to note the importance of the gridded
inventory. With the steps in this table, a national comparison
could be made, but if there are discrepancies, there isn't really a
way to estimate what is causing the discrepancy. Or if there isgood agreement, it isn't possible to know if it's resulting fromcombined over- and under-estimates.

Accepted

Revised, prior inventory, and uncertainty included.

4016

1

6

603

604

In order to avoid mis-understandings that these observations canHiroshi Ito
make GHG invenotories, please add the column "Region",
Inverse model can not identify the emission sources, can indentify
the region of some emission source, such as factories and vehicles.
And also notes, the models data are limited for time series, ex
1990s. There are technical difficulty to compare with trend from1990.

Accepted withmodification

The introductory sentence on top of Table 6.3 is modified to more
specifically state the temporal and spatial scope of the comparison,
limiting is to whole country total and to the years when bothinventory and inverse model products are available.

2154

1

6

605

886

Chapter 6.11 is an extremely well formualted piece of text!!! It is Erik Næsset
simple in wording, but yet scientifcally complete and precise. Welldone. The challenge now is for all the sectoral volumes to be wellin line with this general guidance on models - and particual so
because much new guidance in the sectoral volumes has been
provided with limited opportunity for cross-referencing. (Just acomment)

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

4424

1

6

608

609

"good practice" in italic. Seems the case everywhere else.

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

Melissa Weitz

Kewei Yu

Comment ID Volume Chapter
9892
1
6

From line To line
614
622

Comment
ExpertThis section of text is confused and largely unnecessary. It is over- David Glen
complicated. Why not simply say that "higher tier methods using Thistlethwaite
models that enable better representation of national circumstances
are useful for reducing uncertainty in key categories and can also
be designed to help provide better data resolution (such as
temporal and spatial), which can be helpful for sub-national
inventories and mitigation action tracking." Some of the statementsin this section are neither accurate nor helpful: "Modeldevelopment relies on data from measurements" (line 620) really? This isn't always the case.; "models are used to estimate
those emissions or removals that cannot easily be otherwise
obtained" (line 620-621) - this statement may not be true (e.g.
plenty of examples where Tier 1 or Tier 2 methods could be usedinstead) and if there are instances where it IS true there is nosttempt to justify this statement.

Response
Accepted withmodification

Authors' note
Text clarified based on this comment.

9894

623

As the QA manager for the UK inventory, I have to say that I think David Glen
this section needs a lot of work and I would be very happy to help Thistlethwaite
the authors to develop something better than the current section.
There are some good messages in here and I agree with what thesection is trying to say, but it is not well-structured and does notprovide clear guidance. It also includes some fairly trite or absurd
statements: "models add value to original data" - this sort ofstatement isn't helpful, it doesn't provide any guidance. In my view
this section needs to provide a simple introduction that draws out
some of the key messages (such as the fact that the quality ofmodel outputs are defined by the quality of the model inputs - data
and assumptions). I support the statement that the use of models"do not remove the need for the original data to drive them". Thenthe section ought to fully focus on providing practical goodpractice guidance. I urge the authors to look at the guidancedeveloped by the UK's Single National Entity, BEIS:
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/quality-assuranceguidance-for-models . I advocate a structured approach topresenting "good practice" that covers: (1) Data and assumptions use of the best available country-specific data and assumptions,documenting their origin, and conducting checks on thetransposition of the data and assumptions within the models; (2)structure and data flows - designing models to be clearly structured
with a logical data flow through the model and ideally withseparate sections of the model for data input, calculations, data
outputs;

Accepted withmodification

This is too policy prescriptive - we cannot prescribe a UK specificapproach. However the numbered points are valid and are includedin the text.

1

6

663

Comment ID Volume Chapter
9894 (cont.)

From line To line

Comment
Expert(3) documentation of the model scope, the key equations that are
applied, a user guide (which could be within-model comments or aseparate document), and a clear location for documenting any
issues that are identified in the model by users and for
documenting the outcomes of quality checks;(4) conducting model verification checks at the point of model
commissioning (testing the veracity of the model calculations) anddocumenting these (which could include the outcomes of formal
peer reviews); (5) conducting checks on the model outputs during
annual inventory compilation, to validate that the model isdelivering accurate outputs, including (for example) time-seriesconsistency checks, checks on IEFs against IPCC defaults, checks
on the data for the latest year in the time series (is it broadly
consistent with earlier years - if not, is this justified?), checks onrecalculations since the previous inventory cycle.

Response

Authors' note

1794

1

6

629

630

The meaning of these sentences is unclear.

Melissa Weitz

Accepted

Text adjusted.

7142

1

6

630

630

Replace 'on the average' with 'on average'

Amanda Penistone

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

8632

1

6

670

(IPCC, 2010) comma improtant in such cases

Amanullah Dr.

Noted

528

1

6

677

678

Accepted

EndNote "Environmental conservation" style was used to format
references and citations.
The comment has been addressed in SOD.

530

1

6

677

678

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

7144

1

6

684

684

The word "inventory" was deleted.

2152

1

6

753

753

error propagation: I understand that this term seems to have been Erik Næsset
adopted in the guidance, but isnt it an analythical estimate as
opposed to simulations (Monte Carlo) that is meant here? They areboth means to perform error propagation.

Accepted withmodification
Rejected

532

1

6

764

764

It has to be a third "dot" under the sentence from 759 to 760.

Virginia Sena

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

2150

1

6

774

774

Erik Næsset

1

6

776

777

Virginia Sena

Accepted withmodification
Accepted"GHG Inventories" has been used.

534

800

1

6

777

777

Just "emissions"? GHG inventories are about sinks as well assources.
"…should be made.." is repeated in the sentence. It may be: : "…
(noting that references should be made to existing model
documentation wherever possible):"delete one of two occurrences of "should be made"Wilfried Winiwarter

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

7146

1

6

777

777

remove the second 'should be made'Amanda Penistone

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

1472

1

6

777

777

Accepted withmodification

Text revised.

4426

1

6

826

831

eliminate (should be made) at the beginning of the line: (should be Regine Röthlisbergermade) to existing model documentation should be made wherever
possible.
"Calibration and Checks", "model checks", letter case?
Kewei Yu

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

Figure 6.2. It is written " Assess uncertianties" instead of " Assess Virginia Sena
uncertainties".
Figure 6.2. It is written "Independant data needed to evaluation the Virginia Sena
full model" instead of "Independant data needed to evaluate thefull model" or " Independant data needed to the full model
evaluation".
suggest 'for use in an' inserted between 'selected' and 'inventory'
Amanda Penistone

These are the terms in the guidelines - in fact the error propagation
method is not trully analytical due to the large errors.

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

Comment ID Volume Chapter
536
1
6

From line To line
829
829

ExpertVirginia Sena

Response
Accepted

Authors' note
The comment has been addressed in SOD.

829

Comment
It is written "...optimization that at empts to derive…" instead of"...optimization that attempts to derive…".
"at empts" may be "attempts".

4344

1

6

829

4428

1

6

873

Naofumi Kosaka

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

874

"from" not "form"

Kewei Yu

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

7148

1

6

873

874

use 'from' instead of 'form' in both these lines

Amanda Penistone

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

8634

1

7150

1

6

887

893

need improvement

Amanullah Dr.

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

6

1129

1129

remove 'according'Amanda Penistone

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

4876

1

6

Table 6.1

It is unclear why 'Not used in national reporting' qualifies as aweakness. The Table is mixing what capabilities atmosperic
measurements offer with whether or not they are used. It is better
sorted by keeping it to strengths and weakness, and communicate
the national examples etc in a different way. Also, the Tableheading does not match the column headings.

Elsa Hatanaka

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

4878

1

6

Table 6.1

What is the difference between 'National reporting' and 'Nationalemission estimates' in column 'Strengths/Successes'?

Elsa Hatanaka

Accepted

The correct term is "national emission estimates".

4880

1

6

Table 6.2

Step 2: Gridded prior emissions data,' together with descriptions
Elsa Hatanaka
such as 'UK RAC Model' gives the impression that the the 'UK
RAC Model' etc are gridded. 'Based on UK RAC Model' etc would
be better.

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

5892

1

6

Table 6.2

Under Table 6.2, it could be useful to provide a satellite-based
example here.

Accepted withmodification

More text providing clarity has been added.

5894

1

6

Table 6.3

Beyond just looking at the national totals, the spatial distribution of Vincent Camobreco
fluxes can indicate weaknesses in the inventory. That aspect ismissing here as it’s very focused on national totals. I think inverse
modeling can be a great tool to help guide improvements in thebottom-up in addition to verifying the final results.

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

4882

1

6

Table 6.3

1

6Accepted withmodification
Accepted

Text revised, "best practice".

4416

Under 'Using multiple products' - Is it normail to use 'recommend' Elsa Hatanaka
in IPCC inventory guidelines?
data sets or datasets, be consistent
Kewei Yu

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

4418

1

6

nitrous oxide or N2O, methane or CH4?

Kewei Yu

Accepted

Text reviewed accordingly.

4420

1

6

Table 6.2, Quality Assurance/Qualtiy Control, letter case

Kewei Yu

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

Vincent Camobreco

Comment ID Volume Chapter
6116
1
6

6116 (cont.)

From line To line

Comment
Expert(Proposal for an additional Box article)
Akihiko Kuze
GOSAT is the first satellite to measure solar light penetrating into
the Earth's surface and reflecting back to space with high spectral
resolution using Fourier-Transform Spectrometer technology(Kuze et al., 2009). Onboard spectrometer can measure carbon
dioxide (CO2) and methane (CH4) column density by differential
optical absorption spectroscopy.
Solar light-path modification by thin cloud and aerosol can becorrected using simultaneous measured absorption by oxygen,
which is much more constant than CO2 and CH4. These robust
analytical methods have overcome gradual performance change on
orbit and provided accurate and precise long-term and global datawith a single instrument remotely from space. Several working
groups have derived CO2 and CH4 density routinely using theirown algorithm and processors and each products are intercompared. (Butz et al., 2011; Parker et al., 2011, Crisp et al.,2012, Yoshida et al., 2013, Buchwitz et al. 2017).
Since its launch, measured data have been calibrated by frequentinternational campaigns and retrieved results have been validated
from global ground network such as TCCON (Kuze et. al., 2016,
Wunch et. al., 2011).

GOSAT is a pathfinder for subsequent missions such as OCO-2 in2014 (Crisp et al., 2004), TanSat in 2016 (Liu et al., 2013),
TROPOspheric Monitoring Instrument (TROPOMI) on Sentinel
5P in 2017 (Veefkind et al., 2013). Between OCO-2 and GOSAT,
intercomparison has been performed in different levels: prelaunchcalibration by exchanging each radiometric standard, radiancespectra on orbit, and retrieved CO2 density and these results agree
within the allocated error budget (Sukuma et al, 2009, Kataoka etal, 2017). International collaboration on calibration, validation anddata analysis has demonstrated long-term uniform quality andreliability of greenhouse gases remote sensing from space.

Response
Accepted

Authors' note
Referred to A. Kuze et al.

Comment ID Volume Chapter
8502
1
6

From line To line

Comment
ExpertProposal for an additional Box article in 6.10.2.1
Osamu Ochiai
A series of GHG monitoring satellites have been launched andhave since been providing global CO2 and other GHGs
observations for the past decade. These observations and data arefreely available to the public. Space agencies shared the significant
advances in GHG monitoring from space in recent years anddiscussed steps for potential Space Agency's contributions tostakeholders. In the forum of the Committee on Earth Observation
Satellites (CEOS), Space agencies discuss how satellite GHG data
can best support improving the accuracy of National GHG
inventories. Plans from space agencies are also in place to ensure
the continuity of the future GHG satellite missions in the next
decade as of COP-23.
Recognizing the longevity of the GHG monitoring datasets fromspace, high quality GHG information will be essential for tracking
progress toward the achievement of Nationally Determined
Contributions (NDCs) and for stocktaking. Furthermore,
integrating this information with ground-based measurements andmodeling is important for a monitoring and verification system. In
this context, CEOS and the Coordination Group for Meteorological
Satellites (CGMS) have started an activity to define an optimum
constellation of satellites to meet the requirement of such amonitoring and verification system since 2017.
Further engagement of partnerships and collaborations between therelevant international entities includes: the relationship between
CEOS and CGMS on the space component aspects, thepartnership with the World Meteorological Organization (WMO)
and the Group on Earth Observations (GEO) on the broader
framework, and finally the relationships with the Global Climate
Observing System (GCOS), UNFCCC, and IPCC TFI to better
defining the role for space-based observations in the process of
updating the inventory guidelines.

Response
Noted

Authors' note
Our view is that this chapter provides the simplest methods toaddress data gaps and achieving time series consistency. No change
has been made in the SOD text.

6948

1

7

24

24

Consider changing the title of the chaper to "Percursors andIndirect N2O indirect emissions" because CO2 is not covered as
indirect. Otherwise see comment Vol1_Chp7_L103_181

Rejected

Title should remain generic.

6616

1

7

26

102

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

8636

1

7

27

Experts' guidance to authors from the Minsk and Wollongong
Frank Neitzert
meeting specified refinementts only to Section 7.2.1.5 and text box
7.2.
no need of the sentence
Amanullah Dr.

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

6950

1

7

28

36

This paragraph is important, because it addresses issues related to Vitor Gois Ferreira
the calculation of weighted added emissions using common
metrics. However, it may be more general than this chapter andcould be moved to chapter 1 in a more prominent position.

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

Vitor Gois Ferreira

Comment ID Volume Chapter
4310
1
7

From line To line
28
28

Comment
ExpertI suggest that the authors reconsider the word "Global warming
Naofumi Kosaka
potential-weighted greenhouse gas". IPCC Fifth Assessment
Reports (Working Group 1, Chapter 8, Appendix 8.A) provide the
GWP even for CFCs, HCFCs, NOx, NMVOC, CO and SO2.
Some options are "The greenhouse gases covered in the 2006
IPCC Guidelines" (it is a similar word with the 2006 IPCC
Guidelines, Vol.1, page 1.5) or "Well-mixed greenhouse gases
except for ozone-depleting halocarbons".

Response
Rejected

Authors' note
Wording uses the phraseology of the 2006 IPCC Guidelines.

4430

1

7

29

Volumes? Letter case

Kewei Yu

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

4432

1

7

32

global temperature is not commonly used.

Kewei Yu

6618

1

7

32

4434

1

7

4436

1

7

4438

1

7

42

8638

1

7

65

378

1

7

97

6952

1

7

6648

1

6620

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

Delete mention of GTP metric. Minsk guidance to authors "Avoid Frank Neitzert
mention of specific metrics but could warn on implicantions ofdifferent types…".

Noted

The discussion on GTP metrics is out of the scope of the 2019
Refinement.

38

nitrogen oxides

Kewei Yu

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

39

CO and NOx, do not repeat the definitions, letter case. It happensin other places.
Earth

Kewei Yu

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

Kewei Yu

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

68

need improvement

Amanullah Dr.

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

102

What about the issue of open burning

Jamidu Katima

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

103

181

Some relevant current reporting guidelines (e.g. UNFCCC's new Vitor Gois Ferreira
CRF tables, adopted by dec. 13/CP.20) include reported forindirect CO2 from the atmospheric oxidation of CH4, CO andNMVOCs, and enhanced explanations on this part is quite
important (some countries should some difficulties in separating
direct and indirect CO2 emissions, from instance). Altough, inprinciple the informaiton and methodology in box 7.1 (actually box7.2) is very relevant and could be part of a self standing section, it
may have to remain in a box since reporting of indirect CO2 is notmandatory. Othewise, the placement of this part could fit better
section 3, if that would cover indirect emissions from CO2.

Accepted withmodification

Box 7.2 removed but the structure of the chapter was not changed.
The intention is, not to prejudge any reporting requirements under
the UNFCCC.

7

103

181

Frank Neitzert

Accepted

1

7

105

108

It is recommended that section 7.2.1.5 be edited to be moreconcise and clear and maintain the authors' instructions
Minsk guidance to authors: need to 'make clear that a sufficientinventory contains only emissions in Volumes 2-5'. The
elaboratons do not make that clear and the detailed information
provided later on seems to imply otherwise.

Frank Neitzert

Accepted withmodification

Comment too generic to trigger specific amendments. But section
has been revised.
This is is properly dealt with in Chapter 8. As such, chapter 8 wasrefined to provide greater clarity about the changes made across all
the sectoral volumes.

6622

1

7

107

108

Need appropriate context about the current GWP with regards toCH4 oxidation, if Boucher et al. reference is to be used.

Frank Neitzert

Noted

No action can be taken because comment is out of scope of 2019
Refinement.

6624

1

7

108

108

Correct text to read 'Box 7.2' and not 'Box 7.1'

Frank Neitzert

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in final editing.

35

Comment ID Volume Chapter
6626
1
7

From line To line
108
109

Comment
ExpertMissing second paragraph in Section 7.2.1.5 from the 2006 IPCC Frank Neitzert
Guideline. This paragraph has relevant context on the sources andcontribution of direct GHG relative to non-CO2 gases.

Response
Accepted

Authors' note
However, the contents has been addressed in box 7.2 in FOD. The
text in box 7.2 is changed for the SOD to become guidance text.

6628

1

7

109

109

Correct text to read 'Box 7.2' and not 'Box 7.1'

Noted

Corrected during final editing.

6630

1

7

110

110

Edit heading to make it more specific to indirect CO2. Suggest the Frank Neitzert
following 'Calculating oxidation of CO, CH and NMVOC in theatmosphere from carbon-containing compounds'.

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

6632

1

7

113

114

What are the two groups? What GHG emissions sources are
Frank Neitzert
missing, if compilers are only required to include those identified
in Volume 2 to 5? Suggestion 1) specify the two groups, following
with additional context and 2) be specific/clear as to what's needed(direct GHGs) and not in the inventory.

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

4312

1

7

114

114

It seems some words are missing between "are" and "(Gilenwater2008)".

Naofumi Kosaka

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

6954

1

7

117

120

An additional explanation that this is also the result that theoxidation factor is 1, could be useful in this chapter

Vitor Gois Ferreira

Accepted

Clarification added in main text and footnote 5 and 6.

4314

1

7

118

123

I propose to replace the sentences "IPCC default carbon content … Naofumi Kosaka
category 1A." by "default carbon oxidation factor (100 percent)assumes all carbon in the fuel is oxidized to CO2 in theatmosphere. It means these inputs of CO2 from fossil fuelcombustion related emissions of CH4, CO, and NMVOCs are
already accounted for under the Energy sector category 1A.
Countries may use country-specific carbon oxidation factors withless than 100 percent, assuming the small fraction of carbon
remaining as un-oxidized solids, for example soot or ash (IPCC,
2000, 2006; IPCC/UNEP/OECD/IEA, 1997). It is considered that
CO2 emissions from the atmospheric oxidation of CH4, CO, and
NMVOCs are not included in the current inventories, if countries
use country-specific carbon oxidation factors with less than 100
percent and countries use a direct measurement method to estimate
CO2 emissions from fuel combustion."

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

6634

1

7

119

121

This statement 'except the small fraction of carbon remaining as
unoxidized solids…' contradicts the text leading up to it, if thedefault IPCC emission factors for fuel combustion include theoxidizatin of all carbon in the fuel.

Frank Neitzert

Rejected

Text is a true statement. The 2006 IPCC Guidelines for simplicity
assumes 100% oxidation for default CO2 emission factors.

6956

1

7

124

124

CO2 from biological sources; please check

Vitor Gois Ferreira

Accepted

Expression "biogenic carbon" (based on Glossary of 2006 IPCC
Guidelines) used instead.

Frank Neitzert

Comment ID Volume Chapter
6636
1
7

From line To line
132
137

Comment
The statement in line 133 to 137 is incorrect. The 2006 IPCC
fugitive methods are not based on 'fuel consumption statistics' as
noted. In general, fugitive estimates are based on production
statistics (raw volumes).

ExpertFrank Neitzert

Response
Accepted

Authors' note
The comment has been addressed in SOD.

2352

1

7

132

132

‘Methane' should be 'CH4'

Changliang Shao(Starting a sentence with a formula).

2354

1

7

148

149

‘methane (CH4), carbon monoxide (CO)’ should be 'CH4, CO'

Changliang Shao

Accepted withmodification
Accepted

2356

1

7

153

153

Methane, carbon monoxide (CO)' should be 'CH4, CO'

Changliang Shao

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

2358

1

7

155

155

‘methane' should be 'CH4'

Changliang Shao

Rejected

Disagree (Starting sentence with a formula?).

4316

1

7

159

159

Accepted

Text revised accordingly.

6638

1

7

164

164

I suggest that the authors replace "0.6" by "0.6 for solvent use and Naofumi Kosaka
0.85 for other source categories" in order to be consistent with thedescription of lines 175 through 181.
Some information in Table A7.1 is contradictory to earlier
Frank Neitzert
statements made in line 115 to 123. For example, in Table A7.1,
column 'Already accounted for in the inventory', lines A. Fuel
Combustion Activities and 2.d. Flaring, 'No' has been used toindicate indirect sources. This contradicts 'the IPCC default
carbon content for Co2 emission factors assume all carbon in thefuel is oxidized to CO2....'. Correct 'No' to 'Yes'.

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

6640

1

7

166

169

This paragraph is new and should not be shaded grey.

Frank Neitzert

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

6958

1

7

166

169

This paragraph does not appear to be part of the 2006 Guidelines(unless I am not using the most updated version with errata). If
not, please remove shaded

Vitor Gois Ferreira

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

4318

1

7

179

181

Naofumi Kosaka

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

4442

1

7

181

I suggest that the authors describe the reason or reference of
average carbon content of 85 percent.
better use 85%

Kewei Yu

Rejected

8640

1

7

182

need improvement

Amanullah Dr.

Noted

Text instead of percentage symbol is used to be consistent with therest of the chapter and other chapters in this volume.
Text not amended because of lack of specificity.

8642

1

7

189

move to next page

Amanullah Dr.

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

6962

1

7

190

195

(and also the introduction part of 7.3 in the original 2006 GL)
Vitor Gois FerreiraCountries, when preparing their inventories, show some level of
uncertainty regarding calculation of indirect N2O emissions fromthe waste sector, in particular wastewater. Current section 6.3 in
V5_C5, provides methods for indirect N2O emissions fromleaching of wastewater, and some clarity in chapter v1_c7 thatthese indirect emissions are covered could improve hte general
understanding of inventories. In addition, if the inventory estimates
NOx or NH3 emissions from SWD, wastewater or open-burning,
it is not very clear if these emissions could be also calculated basedon the methodology under 7.3.1

Rejected

Authors of Volume 5, Chapter 5 came to the conclusion that it
would be appropriate to REMOVE the term DIRECT or
INDIRECT emissions in the context of waste water treatment.

2360

1

7

194

194

Emissions' should be 'emissions'

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

188

Changliang Shao

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

Comment ID Volume Chapter
6642
1
7

From line To line
230
232

Comment
ExpertExperts' guidance to authors from the Minsk and Wollongong
Frank Neitzert
meeting specified refinementts only to Section 7.2.1.5 and text box
7.2.
This part is also important and could be made more clear, byVitor Gois Ferreira
indication of what sources and tables and specifying that thecurrent UNFCCC guidelines are those adopted by decisions
13/CP.20 and 6/CMP.9

Response
Accepted

Authors' note
Text has been deleted.

6960

1

7

230

232

Noted

No action can be taken because comment is out of scope of 2019
Refinement.

1474

1

7

248

249

I don't quite understand the entries in column "Already accounted Regine Röthlisberger
for in inventory?". It seems as if the logic is inverted. For example
line "A. Fuel combustion activities", it is stated "No", however, theexplanation provided in the main text and in column "Explanation"states, that if calculated using the carbon content of fuels as
emission factor, emissions are tipically included. This is acontradiction. For Coal mining or venting of natural gas, on theother hand, the answer in column "Already accounted for ininventory?* is yes, but I consider these emissions as not accountedfor.

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

1476

1

7

248

249

footnote (d) in the table needs rewording. As it is now, I don't
understand it.

Regine Röthlisberger

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

4324

1

7

248

249

I suggest that the authors replace the column title "Alreadyaccounted for in inventory?" by "Already accounted for in Tier 1
methodologies?". Then, Yes in that column should be No, viceversa.

Naofumi Kosaka

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

6964

1

7

248

248

The reference "Already included in the inventory" is unclear. Does Vitor Gois Ferreira
it mean, as direct emissions? Together with direct emissions (inwhich case No for Fuel combustion activities could be incorrect

Accepted

Column title revised to enhance clarity.

4320

1

7

248

249

I suggest that the authors replace "carbon content factors" by
Naofumi Kosaka"default carbon oxidation factor" under "Explanation" column of"Fuel Combustion Activities" and "Incineration and open burningof waste" in order to be consistent with the 2006 IPCC Guidelines,
Vol.2, Ch. 1, Table 1.4 and Vol.5, Ch.5, Section 5.4.1.3.

Accepted withmodification"Oxidation factors" have been added under fuel combustion.

4322

1

7

248

249

I suggest that the authors reconfirm the default emission factors of Naofumi Kosaka
fugitive emissions from fuels take into account the CO2 fromatmospheric oxidation of CH4, CO and NMVOCs, because theemission factors will be refined in the 2019 refinementt (seeVolume 2, Section 4.2.2.3).

Noted

Emission factors included in Volume 2, section 4.2.2.3 do not andwill not address oxidation to CO2 in the atmosphere. No change
has been made to the text.

Comment ID Volume Chapter
6966
1
7

From line To line
250
250

Comment
AFOLU, forests in particular, may be responsible for biogenic
emissions. The title of this table could clarify that these are nonbiogenic NMVOCs

6644

1

7

250

250

4018

1

7

250

6646

1

7

6968

1

7

4440

1

4836

1

ExpertVitor Gois Ferreira

Response
Accepted

Authors' note
The comment has been addressed in SOD.

Minsk guidance to authors indicated that 'there is no intention toFrank Neitzert
include additional gases or emission factors.' These splits appear
to be emission factors used to split the portion of NMVOCs by
activities. Furthermore, this is based on data from Finland andwould not necessarily be representative for other countries,
considering that NMVOCs are process- and technology-dependent.
In addition, it should be clarified that fuel combustion estimates
based on default values assume that all carbon is combusted andreleased as CO2, thus indirect CO2 emisisons from NMVOC are
already accounted for (including those from) flaring. This is also
true for CO, and CH4 from fuel combustion and flaring.

Noted

Split of NMVOC is noted; has been based on survey of NMVOC
speciation emission data; it is assumed that it is a robust
assumption that similar products have similar composition indifferent countries. The table has been corrected to reflect that
combustion estimates based on default factors account already forindirect CO2 emissions. Table A7.1 also stipulates that for
combustion activites, a complete oxidation factor is assumed.

251

Would you make a default carbon contents by sources? 0.6 for all
sources seems smaller.

Hiroshi Ito

Rejected

Suggestion is not coherent with literature from (Seinfeld andPandis, 1998) and (Boucher et al, 2009).

253

253

Minsk guidance to authors indicated that 'there is no intention to
include additional gases or emission factors.' Percent carbon
information in Table A7.3 appear to be intended for use as
emission factors or to derive emission factors.

Frank Neitzert

Accepted

Clarifying text added.

253

253

I can't find a comprehensive source for these values, but would not Vitor Gois Ferreira
be expected that the carbon content of these susbatnces is known,or at least a good estimate could result from chemicalcomposition? Why the need to make reference to countries'
inventories? The use of country references frequently raises
questions concerning the applicability of values in the IPCC toother countries, and this ambiguity should be avoided.

Accepted

Clarifying text added.

7

CO. A sentence should not be started with an abbreviation.

Kewei Yu

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

7

Reporting guidance of indirect gases should be included in thisrefinementts..

Taka Hiraishi

Noted

No action can be taken because comment is out of scope of 2019
Refinement.

Comment ID Volume Chapter
5624
1
8

From line To line

Comment
Expert
It is recommended that IPCC requires nations to also report black Mingming Wang
carbon. Black carbon is a climate forcing agent and has huge direct
health impacts. Some nations act more strongly on air pollution
and black carbon than climate actions, so including black carbon innational GHG inventories but could help align climate actions andair pollution actions, making stronger case for both andmaximising impact of efforts. In addition, nations often alreadyhave good data available on black carbon so there should be little
extra burden on data collection. In fact, we are seeing some cities
already doing so. For example, Mexico City has been producing
integrated inventories to cover both GHGs and black carbon.

Response
Noted

Authors' noteNo action can be taken because comment is out of scope of 2019
Refinement.
Methods for estimating emissions of black carbon are outside of thescope of the 2019 Refinement.

9716

1

8

It is strongly recommended that the Common Reporting Format(CRF) split the reporting of fuels (and emissions) from heatproduction and electricity production, to enable calculation ofcountry specific emission factors for grid electricity.

Mingming Wang

Noted

No action can be taken because comment is out of scope of 2019
Refinement.
CRF is not an IPCC Product. It is a product based on a decision
made by the Parties to the UNFCCC.

9744

1

8

It is recommended that IPCC requires nations to use latest versions Mingming Wang
of GWP values in order to increase comparability between nations.
It is also strongly recommended that IPCC requires (or strongly
recommends) nations to use GWP20 values instead of GWP100
for short-lived pollutants such as CH4 emissions to properly reflect
their impacts. As a demonstration, we analysed inventories from12 large cities across the globe, and noticed that their total
emissions would increase by up to 83.8% (with an averageincrease of 30.64%) when using GWP20 for CH4 instead of
GWP100. The biggest impacts were observed in the Waste sector,
where emissions increased by 62% ~ 200%. As increased climate
action is becoming despairingly urgent, we need to emphasize theimpacts of methane - especially over the medium-term, a timeframeof growing concern to scientists and decision makers. Aggressive
action to reduce methane across all sectors can deliver a 0.5º intemperature reduction by 2050. Waste sector can contribute to atleast 25% of those reductions, and nations, cities and private
sectors tend to have more power and influence on waste sector.
Therefore it would be a huge concern and a big missed opportunity
if the impacts of methane emissions are not fully realised andmisled by the use of GWP100.

Noted

No action can be taken because IPCC should not give policy
prescriptive guidance.
The IPCC guidance for national inventories provides methods for
estimating emissions (and removals as appropriate) of each gas,irrespective of their GWP values. The greenhouse gas "accounting"framework should be discussed and decided by the Conference of
the Parties to the UNFCCC, not by the IPCC. Decision on the GWPvalues to be used under the UNFCCC reporting/accounting should
be made by the UNFCCC.

4444

1

Annexes

Chapter 7, letter caseAccepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

21

Kewei Yu

Comment ID Volume Chapter
From line To line
7850
1
Appendices D
D

Comment
ExpertChange title of column D "Gas" to "Greenhouse Gas". This change Raul Salas Reyes
will also have to be made on Volume 1 Chapter 3 line 490 andtable 3.1 from the same document

Response
Accepted

Authors' note
The comment has been addressed in SOD.

8592

1

In refernces section only few refernces are given and most of them Amanullah Dr.
are very old. We must include new literture of 2018, 2017, 2016
and so on.

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.

6946

1

As a general comment, the additions and refinementts to volume 1 Vitor Gois Ferreiraappear to be very well advanced, transparent and improving theunderstanding of the inventories.

Accepted

The comment has been addressed in SOD.