Subject: Re: transmittal draft NACP
Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2001 08:16:30 -0600
From: "Eldor A. Paul" <eldor@cnr.colostate.edu>
To: Steven_Wofsy@harvard.edu, GCC -- cfield <chris@jasper.stanford.edu>,
     birdsey <rbirdsey@fs.fed.us>, hollinger <davidh@hypatia.unh.edu>,
     bakwin <pbakwin@cmdl.noaa.gov>, denning <denning@atmos.colostate.edu>,
     dilling <dilling@ogp.noaa.gov>, djj@io.harvard.edu,
     sundquist <esundqui@usgs.gov>, harriss <harriss@ucar.edu>,
     jcollatz@biome.gsfc.nasa.gov, sarmiento <jls@splash.princeton.edu>,
     Eldor Paul <eldor@cnr.colostate.edu>, bakwin <pbakwin@cmdl.noaa.gov>,
     andrews <andrews@maia.gsfc.nasa.gov>, pieter <ptans@cmdl.noaa.gov>,
     Richard.A.Feely@noaa.gov, Steven_Wofsy@harvard.edu,
     running <swr@ntsg.umt.edu>, fan <fan@splash.princeton.edu>,
     Manuel Gloor <mgloor@bgc-jena.mpg.de>, chg@io.harvard.edu,
     jcl@io.harvard.edu, gruber <gruber@splash.princeton.edu>,
     Chris Sabine <Sabine@pmel.noaa.gov>, wickland <dwicklan@mail.hq.nasa.gov>,
     dahlman <roger.dahlman@oer.doe.gov>, Mike Jawson <mdj@ars.usda.gov>,
     crill <patrick.crill@unh.edu>,
     Steve Pawson GSFC DAO <spawson@dao.gsfc.nasa.gov>, schimel@ucar.edu

Just a few

1) Page 2,line 14. I am perplexed by what we mean by the sentence
Atmospheric CO2 increased rapidly after 1700.
2) Page 3 line 7. Should be plants and soil not plans
3) Page 5 point 1 under highest priority. We say that insitu sensors for
aircraft tower , ocean, tower and soil flux measurements etc need to be
developed. There are cost estimates  for atmosheric and ocean CO2 but not
for soils The costs for the soil CO2 measurements will also be $1-2 m over
two yeas and are absolutely essential. Towers by themslves can not give us
the numbers that are needed . We also need these over a wide range of
sites. Please insert this budget item.
4) Eventually this  document needs to go through the hands of a
professional writer- proposal developer to ensure consistency and
readability.