Climate change: An interview with Rajendra Pachauri | The Economist

The Economist: I wondered if we could start off on the matter of the glaciers. When you first read the passages with the mistakes in?

Dr Pachauri: Well to be quite honest, I’ve gone through the entire IPCC report very quickly, but this particular thing never really came to my attention...
...
Dr Pachauri: I agree, but usually when you are talking about something which is global, such as climate change, surely it would apply to every side of the mountain. I mean, you may have different rates of melting, that’s a different issue. How can it be that glaciers all over the world appear to be melting and that we are somehow insulated from what’s happening over here?
...
Dr Pachauri: I possibly didn’t read his e-mails, as you can imagine, I get thousands of e-mails every day, I can give you a count of those.
...
Dr Pachauri: It has increased like everybody else’s salary. We make sure that we keep up with inflation and the chairman of the governing council decides on that. To be quite honest and you may not believe it, I really don’t know what my salary is. This is just something that comes to my bank, my chairman set the salary I think two years ago, when there was an increase, and I really have never bothered about it. You might find that difficult to believe, but that’s a fact. I just don’t know what my salary is.
...
The Economist: There’s one other much broader point I’d like to bring up, which is that there is obviously a line to draw between information and policy advice. The IPCC is constituted to provide information that policy might draw on. It’s often felt that in some of your remarks you actually go further than that and suggest that the IPCC’s information should actually drive policy. I wonder if you could clarify how you think about that relationship between information and advice?

Dr Pachauri: Well, I always look at the scientific evidence and I provide whatever there is in the IPCC 4th assessment report, and interpret in terms of the policy choices. I’ve never said that anyone must do a, b or c. [see counter-examples below]

Flashback: AFP: Carbon emissions must peak by 2015: UN climate scientist

"If this path of mitigation is to be embarked on, to ensure stabilisation of temperatures at the level that I mentioned (2 C, 3.6 F), then global emissions must peak by 2015," [Pachauri] said.

Flashback: Dr R K Pachauri's Blog

The positives from Copenhagen can be listed as the fact that this accord lays down a limit of 2 °C as the increase in temperature that the parties to the accord have clearly specified as the ceiling acceptable, and which human actions must target now.

Flashback: New pact must have Kyoto Protocol features: Pachauri

"The provisions of the Kyoto Protocol are sacrosanct for countries like India and even if the new agreement goes by another name, the essential features of Kyoto Protocol must be preserved," Pachauri told reporters here.