So, how is that ozone layer coming along?

Question

About ten years ago I kept hearing about if we didn't stop the ozone layer from dissappearing that it would be catastrophic to our world. It would cause the polar ice caps to melt and would cause coral reefs to be bleached and dissappear. It would kill off all sorts of organisms and cause major skin diseases in people and animals. This was a huge topic, but now it never seems to make the news. We know the hole is still expanding in the ozone layer, yet we're focussing on Global Warming instead, and we're not even sure if CO2 is the culprit. Shouldn't we worry more about the ozone layer? Or has recent scientific data found that the ozone layer is just fine?

Answer 1

We solved that problem by banning chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs).  In fact, it was a Republican president (Ronald Reagan) who signed the Montreal Protocol (somewhat similar to the Kyoto Protocol) to phase-out the use of CFCs.

CFCs stay in the atmosphere for a while, so the ozone layer is just slowly starting to recover, but we essentially solved that problem.  Now we need to focus on a similar but more difficult one in greenhouse gas emissions causing global warming.

Answer 2

well, CO2 or the other stuff is more important because they are whats causing the problem! if we stop the co2 problem, the ozone layer can repair itself and re-stabalize, but if we do nothing it will just get worse and everyone will DIE. I'm not joking we could all DIE if we don't do anything.

Answer 3

Other than the main transports of Hurricanes, typhoons, thunderstorms, and of course the jet stream. The ozone up so high in the stratosphere, has nothing to worry about when it comes to volcano’s and natural (CIO)…upwelling. or does it. HMMMM ?

As far as Professor F. Sherwood Rowland theory goes; EM ETIB

Answer 4

It was never confirmed that CFC's were causing the holes in the ozone so a lot of people spent much money retro-fitting air conditioners and such with the new less effective refridgerants.  We also hear nothing of acid rain and Y2K was a blip on the radar like so many other annoying scares.

Answer 5

The decreased ozone over Antartica widens then shrinks on an annual seasonal basis.  The hole was first discovered in 1985 and it was immedately over-hyped with worries that similar holes would form in other parts of the world, which never happened, nor will it happen.

Ozone is created when UV radiation interacts with oxygen molecules, and the cold Antartic sunless winters, and the Antartic vortex of cold air create unique conditions to aid chlorofluorocarbons depletion of ozone.  Another hype of the 80's was the prediction that we would soon see the beginnings of another ice age.

Global warming is also over-hyped.  Global warming is real, but the primary cause is ignored.  During periods of increased sunspot activity the earth is bombarded with increased solar radiation, and in recent times the sun has experienced the most intense period of sunspot activity ever recorded.  Interestingly, global temperatures dropped over the past year.

Yesterday I read the following article claiming other planets in the solar system have been experiencing their own global warming.  This is due to increased solar activity.  It's feared Mars might loose it's southern polar ice cap.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?f...

Answer 6

It is fine, guess Al Gore is going to have to figure out some other way to make more millions, instead of off the taxpayers.

Answer 7

they dont know how long the ozone layer hole has been there, so it could have been there for millions of years and they just now found it, which would mean that its not that big of a deal.

Answer 8

ozone is now OK.... It's getting slightly better in the past decade, because of the ban on CFC, (however, it is still nowhere near the level of pre 1980s, in the polar regions, there's only 1/3 of the Ozone left compared to 1970s)

However, the polar regions the ozone still has a big hole. Ozone layer doesn't not really block that much heat. (it's actually a green house gas because of how it absorbs infrared radiation) Polar region's problems are caused by the acumulation of CFC, Polor vortex, and poloar Stratospheric clouds combined.

The real big concern is the UV radiation from those polar holes. Australia and New Zealand is around the only 2 nations really worried about it.

However, a wide spread destruction of the Ozone layer, (most likely not facilitated by humans, more like a supernova, which has so much energy that it can create Nitrogen oxides in our atmosphere, which is a catalyst of O3) would cause huge destruction. The UV radiation then would cause severe DNA destruction and cancer in all life exposed to the sun. Plankton might also die out and cause a collapse of the food web in the ocean.

Also..... Global warming and Ozone layer are UNRELATED...., CO2 does not effect O2<->O3 cycle (as stated above, Ozone actually a green house gas) destruction of the Ozone layer is caused by Catalyzation of O3 molecule. Main culprits are CFC(chlorofluorocarbons) Nitrogen Oxides, and Halogens

Answer 9

Scientific data on climate change has evolved significantly. The Co2 theory is argued because both sides of the argument were blind. Science and academia teach temperature with the greatest of accuracy in a calculator.

Meteorologists pass on the design criteria for the entire country with the goal of imposing on our environment as little as possible. Development and buildings are designed as well as insulated for local temperature extremes. The amount of fossil fuels, hydro, GHG emissions, energy consumption, electrical generation, fire integrity, health, investment and overall sustainability is determined by the design criteria passed on by meteorologists services.

What the meteorologists didn't know is that buildings and development are signed off as code compliant, then insured based on compliance. Architects and trades are blind to design temperatures because our visible spectrum doesn't see heat until it is glowing hot. Signing buildings off as compliant meant buildings shouldn't be generating heat. The EPA assumes that buildings and development aren't generating any heat on the surface of the planet. They assume buildings absorb the heat of the day, not generate heat.

Weather is the interaction of 3 things, air pressure, water vapor and temperature. Change any of the 3 factors and you change the weather formula. We do not want man to generate heat that will lower air pressure, warm the globe and change climate.

Remember this, the entire global warming argument is blind including the United Nations.

Thermografix Consulting Corporation in Western Canada completed several years of the most advanced temperature imaging in the world to qualify building performance. The imaging took years because buildings and new development were imaged through several seasons to see their energy function.

The temperature information isn't controversial, it is simply the evolution of temperature measurement letting professionals see the temperatures they designed for instead of calculation.

The research showed that we are scraping the earth of everthing living to put up buildings and development. Removing trees and scraping the ground of cover is allowing solar radiation to scorch the earth by generating extreme heat on the surface of the planet. Solar exposed absorbent building exteriors are actually generating heat close to boiling temperature and we are reacting to the heat symptoms with ozone depletion.

Go to the following link and see how California as well as others are getting knocked off the electrical grid treating heat symptoms. Air conditioning is in fact refrigeration associated with ozone depletion. The refrigerants deplete the ozone and there is more UV impact. The buildings will generate more heat and we will use more refrigeration to react to the heat symptom....the cycle continues.

The wasted electrical generation associated with "air conditioning" loads is big, produces mercury emissions, acid rain and no one is discussing the extreme heat generation. What is the significance of heat trapping Co2 compared to every building generating extreme heat right after sunrise until sunset and into the night.

The link is http://www.thermoguy.com/globalwarming-h... and see how you can change your building with lighter colors, shade and zero emissions. Economists and governments are missing the information you will see at the link. Here is a link to our letter to the Western US Governors and Western Canadian Provinces. http://www.thermoguy.com/pdfs/Western_Cl...

Here is the link to our letter regarding the United Nations in Bali. http://www.thermoguy.com/pdfs/Press_Rele...

This is a link to the Canadian Government's challenge on ozone depleting refrigerants while at the same time we are using ozone depleting refrigerants called air conditioning in almost every new building. http://www.ec.gc.ca/default.asp?lang=En&...

Scroll down the heat gain page until you see the article on babies being the victims of climate change.(they are getting the mercury from coal generated electrical for air conditioning) The link to the Body Burden showed a 100% toxicity ratio in newborns before they take their first breath and it means cancer, reproductive problems as they have no ability to protect themselves.

The ozone is doing crappy and in our quest for more possessions, our children and theirs will pay dearly. We need to smarten up right now and even then, environmental h**l is coming for what we are doing. The bright side about seeing the advanced temperature imaging is that academia, governments, environmental groups and lawyers will have the required evidence to become sustainable.

Answer 10

Introduction:  California can start a worldwide revolution by becoming carbon neutral. In some ways this new standard is superior to the requirements of AB32. Carbon Neutral is only achievable by stopping procrastination and making real changes to keep earth sustainable including in the energy debate, finance and regulation plus reducing natural threats and mitigating numerous others. A pollution surcharge and progressive consumption tax is far superior to the proposed cap and trade systems under the Kyoto Protocols and the European System. Simply by reducing emissions California does not reach the desired outcome of a more stabilized cooler atmosphere. Mankind needs energies and fuels that changes the way we think and live with multiple beneficial outcomes. Instead of burning fuel creating heat, bold renewable energies are needed that have the potential to be massively produced at lower prices than fossil fuel. Mankind needs energies and/or fuels to cool earth; these energies must create a whole new set of standards, new or renewed industries and a new and renewed international growing economy. The industrial revolution has put chemicals into space like refrigerants, methane and carbon monoxide that are destroying Ozone and causing global warming. With the peak of oil in the 1970’s, peak natural gas in the 1990’s, having mined cheep coal, the peak of ocean fishing in the 1980’s and the peak of uranium in the 1990’s, governments have to change. Otherwise, the result is:  change is on the way; we just do not know what changes let alone where and when. Fossil fuels are nonrenewable resource and with increasing demand over the next 30 years, gas will sell for $30 per gallon without major intervention. California, therefore, must look beyond the bigger picture, beyond solar concentrating electric power plants, wind, wave, small hydro-electric, geothermal, and even beyond nuclear energy. Humans must understand many of mankind’s advancements cause earth surface to warm, destroy the ozone layer, kill off endanger species, heat cities, and in some way cause more dramatic destruction:  blacktop and buildings (roads, roofs and parking lots-heat cities), deforestation (air pollution, soil erosion), dust storms (increase hurricanes and cyclones, cause lung diseases), fires (cause pollution, mud slides, and deforestation), refrigerants (like CFC's), solvents, including benzene (destroy the ozone layer raising skin cancer rates, cause air pollution), and plastics (clogging landfills, killing fish and birds) while most cars, airplanes, ships and electricity production (causes pollution including raised CO2 levels and increased lung and other diseases). Mankind has destroyed half of the wetlands, cut down nearly half of the rain and other forests, and advance on the earths grasslands while advancing desertification which increases dust storms. But adding a small amount of CO2 to the atmosphere enlarges the earths sun collection causing warming which is more prevalent at the poles; increase the amount of water in the atmosphere (warming earth’s surface) and it forms clouds cooling earth but sometimes causing tornados and/or flooding. With so many variables, the climate models are having to be made as we go along with current evidence! Even other natural events are warming earth and causing destruction. The sun has an increased magnetic field causing increases in earthquakes (more destruction), volcanoes (great destruction), sun spots and even lighting (producing ozone near the surface raising air pollution levels) later increasing the size of the ozone layer. Some humans know that to solve global warming including saving Earth’s Coral, a major goal in winning the global warming battle, and saving the ice caps is going to cost a great deal of money. As with any investment the sooner we start the less the price tag will rise. Humans know what is cost effective; where better technologies are needed. Earth's resource of oil energy, estimated at 3 trillion barrels, is supplied by the Sun to Earth every 2 days. The sun is available to produce energy, bring light to buildings and makes most of human’s fresh water. With 50 trillion dollars worth of stuff that needs oil, natural gas or coal to operate, it will take a generation to depreciate these assets and cause the shift humans demand. Estimates are that humans need 20 trillion dollars of renewable energy, conservation and new technologies by 2020. That puts California’s share at $2,500,000,000,000. Californian’s have to put our money where we get the best return on investments and where we get multiple beneficial outcomes. Energy conservation is the wise use of energy plus the right time of usage. While energy efficiency is putting the right equipment in that uses the least amount of energy. Efficiency is like buying a car that gets 60 miles per gallon, but still having to plan our trips and time of usage to conserve energy.

Carbon Neutral Solution:  carbon neutral technologies are being advanced and will continue to be a big part of this century’s greatest technological advancements: Compressed Liquefied Air (CLA) has more potential energy per gallon than gasoline used by a car. CLA is a viable form of power that allows the accumulation and transport of energy that can be made cheaper than fossil fuels. One CLA gas is liquid nitrogen; it is cold enough to improve our lives by allowing resistant free electron flow, also know as (AKA) superconductors. Motors run better; generators produce more power, and transmission lines transfer more power. With superconductors supplying power, it is best to go to six phase power generation and transmitting system. CLA could power almost any device powered by gasoline today when used with other types of clean energy like batteries. Electric car superconductor engines will end the fuel mileage standards debate. These technological breakthroughs means a new generation of concentrating solar power plant, hydro-electric power plants, wind turbines and wave power plants generators will dramatically increase efficiencies. Because not all good solar locations are good for electric production; therefore, new direct thermal solar to CLA, Biosphere Cleanup MachinesTM (BCM), use concentrating solar energy to CLA by taking in and cleaning up hot deserts air. Solar power can also be used in new low altitude satellites, cruse ships in the sky that sail endlessly in the jet-stream, an electric airplane AKA, Atmospheric Cleanup MachinesTM (ACM) which produce liquid air and separate out the oxygen and nitrogen while cleaning up the other chemical in the atmosphere. The CLA is then available for the USA to build a cross country superconductor electric high speeds train capable of 200 MPH. California must work with Amtrak to build a high-speed route from Mexico City to Anchorage, Alaska, starting with Los Angles to Stockton. Phase two will expand the route to Sacramento in the North and San Diego to the South. But California must start by expanding San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) service to San Jose, Santa Rosa, Sacramento, and Stockton. To best take advantage of this extraordinary global warming solution, California must plan a later expansion from Sacramento to Monterey Bay through San Jose. And Sacramento must expand the Light Rail to Placerville, Roseville and Woodland. To control flooding, California must upgrade the pumping stations to superconductor and double the pumping capacity of state water works, and double the capacity of water treatment plants. California has to regulate ground water and all wells. Another flood prevention step is to upgrade sewage treatment plants to double storage capacity and mandate all water to be recycled keep out of ground water, the ocean and rivers. Recycled water can be used to water lawns, golf courses, in cooling towers, agriculture and nonhuman consumption live stocks. California has to meet the new electrical demands with conservation, new hydro projects, solar and new and replacement nuclear power plants. Estimates are that California needs 20 gigawatts of concentrating solar steam turbine electric generating power plants. Pushing the limits of heat transmission, a new generators and using heat recovery, are several breakthrough technologies that will improve solar concentrating power plants from 35 percent efficiencies up to 60 percent. California has to double output of existing hydro electric power plants and add many small ones all over. California has 1200 water storage and hydro systems, add 300 more 5 the size of Shasta. California needs 100 by 2012; this put us far behind our needs. New dams are the answer to fresh water storage, energy, flood control and cooling earth by evaporation. California rivers must be returned to living natural waterways and parks. It is vital to earth to return the water flow to the Colorado River. California can build one nuclear power plant when this proposal is adopted then four by 2020 with ten overall. California has to move past the “turn it off mode” to conserve large amounts of energy and to push for higher standards. Californian’s must embrace old and used wood recycling,  used lamp recycling and used engine oil, plastic, bio-waste, cosmetics, used tires, sewage treatment floaters to make bio-fuels and synthetic gasoline even using natural gas and coal. All public schools must add online classes to conserve energy while adding solar. Public schools are to work out plans to end most electric use by 1 PM in the summer-end of May to beginning of September. UC to combine all online classes to form an online campus, same with CSU system and no student can start at university, must start at community college, take AP classes in high school or online undergrad classes. To give renewable energy a competitive advantage, we must have a pollution surcharge where we pay the real price (health effects, global warming and cleanup) for oil,

Answer 11

Ozone depletion is a religion, not a science.  

When scientists first measured the ozone layer it was found to be thicker in some places than others.  Researchers eagerly call the thinest region a hole and implied that before humans impacted the environment, it was all even and then we destroyed some of it.  The ozone layer has had some very slight changes in the period humans have been observing it, but nobody has been able to prove that human activity is a significant contributor to changes in the ozone layer.  

The faithful still cling to the idea that humans have put a hole in the ozone layer.

Answer 12

Some actual facts on the ozone hole

Answer 13

"it would be catastrophic . . . and animals."

No, you're thinking of CO2 emissions.

If you're going to bash a scientific theory at least take the time to figure out which one you're meant to be bashing.