The main body of the AR5 WG1 Report has been published today, Sep 30th, as promised.
This consists of the version of the report written in June 2013, following the second round of review comments, together with a few minor corrections, listed in the document labelled Changes to the Underlying Scientific/Technical Assessment (IPCC-XXVI/Doc.4). These corrections are to make the main report consistent with the SPM released on Friday.
There is a note saying that
The Final Draft Report has to be read in conjunction with the document entitled “Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. Working Group I Contribution to the IPCC 5th Assessment Report – Changes to the Underlying Scientific/Technical Assessment” to ensure consistency with the approved Summary for Policymakers (IPCC-XXVI/Doc.4) and presented to the Panel at its Thirty-Sixth Session. This document lists the changes necessary to ensure consistency between the full Report and the Summary for Policymakers, which was approved line-by-line by Working Group I and accepted by the Panel at the above-mentioned Sessions.
Unfortunately, the Changes document linked above doesn’t make much sense at all, and seems to contain a lot of mistakes.
It says that
Note that page and line numbers for the SPM and underlying report below are all based on the numbering used in the final drafts as distributed to governments on 7 June 2013.
So to make sense of this you need access to the documents distributed to governments on 7 June – which have not been made public! However, since the final draft just released is dated 7 June, presumably this is the same thing.
Some mistakes in the changes document:
- The first change refers to Ch 2 p 2 line 21, which doesn’t exist. I think it means p 4 line 21. Similarly the second entry.
- The fifth and sixth changes refer to Ch 2 p 2 line 38 and 39. I think this should be page 38, page 39.
- Towards the end it refers to SPM tables up to Table SPM.7. But the SPM only has 3 tables and the draft version only had 2. Perhaps it means figures rather than tables.
I suppose this shows that the stories of IPCC delegates being over-tired and not getting enough sleep were all true.