Global warming doubters - do you understand the science behind the hole in the ozone layer?

Question

Many AGW doubters have compared global warming to the hole in the ozone layer and Y2K bug. These were both serious problems which we solved.

The hole in the ozone layer was caused by human clorofluorocarbon (CFC) emissions. Industrialized countries stopped these emissions in the 1990s due to the Montreal Protocol.

Some AGW doubters claim that the hole in the ozone layer was a trumped-up problem. Others claim that we didn't solve the problem because the hole continues to grow.

"At about 25 million square kilometres, the hole is the smallest it is been in five years."

"The effects of the CFCs will linger for a long time. The ozone depleting chemicals are some of the longest lived chemicals in the atmosphere - on average, typically 100 years or so,"

http://au.news.yahoo.com/071116/21/14zgv.html

Do AGW doubters understand this basic science, and can they see the parallel between CFCs/ozone layer/Montreal Protocol and greenhouse gases/global warming/Kyoto Protocol?

The answer to my question appears to be 'no'

Answer 1

Dude , your like trying to communicate with a brick wall.

The doubters don't want to believe, they're in denial...

Some are even paid to hawk sites like this and post garbage!

Answer 2

You neglected to quote the part of the article that confirms that there is a great deal of variability in the ozone layer, Dana.

"Dr Paul Fraser is from CSIRO's Marine and Atmospheric Research division. He says while scientists believe the hole is shrinking, its size does vary from year to year.

"The biggest driver of the year-to-year variability in the ozone hole are stratospheric temperatures, and this was a particularly warm year in the stratosphere," he said.

"When you have a warm stratosphere, the processes that destroy ozone in conjunction with the CFCs (chloro fluoro carbon) are much less efficient, and so you end up with a relatively small ozone hole.

"So the year to year variability is determined by the temperature changes, but they're superimposed on a long-term trend and we think that's heading in the right direction towards eventual ozone recovery, but that's going to take a long time."

He says the fact that CFCs (ozone depleting substances) were phased out has helped the situation."

I am not arguing that CFC's affect ozone concentrations. CFC's can destroy a great deal of ozone during its lifetime. But, there is still a great deal of variability in ozone during the year. That there is a certain amount of variability is not the first piece of information that people tend to publish.

Answer 3

The "ozone hole" has been shown to be caused by natural fluctuations in atmospheric conditions. It can be affected by volcanic eruptions and solar activity.

The "hole" fluctuates in size from year to year without any influence of CFC pollution. The U.S. might have given up CFCs, but not all countries of the world, even some industrialized countries, are governed by environmental whackos and it is still in use. The CFC pollution is still there, and the "hole" still fluctuates at it's normal rates. And nothing bad has happened to the earth.

Quit running around like "chicken-little" with your head cut off and get a life - like every proclaimed "environmentalist" should. Practice conservation - don't freak out over the cult of environmentalism.

Answer 4

whats your point?

I think most if not all people believe in global warming. I think the debate lies in the cause and the solution.

Is global warming natural or caused by man?? No one who is honest can answer that definitively.

In addition, is the solution to global warming selling 40 million SUVs to buy 40 million more cars that get 5 mpg better. That does not sound like a real solution but a great sales tactic.

The issue has gotten so fare away from science that knowing who is lying and who is not is difficult. From what I have seen and read from scientists they say it is happening and don't know how or why. They also say they think that conservation might slow it but not solve it.

The real issue is over population. Not cars, or spray cans, or oil. If we had half the people on the planet we would have 1/2 the consumption. The planet cannot sustain this many people period....why don't people talk about that??? because they wont get reelected. Its not socially ok to tell people to stop popping out kids.

Answer 5

Ozone is caused by what? Some say carbon dioxide some say oxygen exposed to the sun. Others say it is the humans that cause it, including the plants and animals.
Well if they are all right or at least some are right then why would there be a big surprise that there is a hole in the ozone layer over an uninhabited wasteland of snow and ice. There is nothing there to cause ozone, so it makes sense that the ozone would be thinner or non-existing over that area of the planet. If the hole was caused by humans and their CFCs then shouldn't the hole be over industrial nations?

Answer 6

Do you understand what the biggest source of ozone depletion that has actually been measured is?

If you will look at the data you will notice that ozone minimum drops by 80 Dobson units from 1982 - 1986. And from 1992 - 1995 it drops another 40 Dobson units. Surely you do not believe these steps are from large releases of CFC's.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Min_o...

It is caused by the 1982 El-Chichon eruption and the 1991 Pinatubo eruption. Or Sulfur Dioxide, which gets converted to Sulfuric Acid in the stratosphere, which happens to be a primary source of Ozone depletion.

http://denali.gsfc.nasa.gov/research/so2...

Answer 7

Ozone depletion is fairly academic these days as CFCs are virtually phased out.

I was under the impression that the theory was somewhat speculative as the link between CFC's and ozone depletion has been established, but I don't think any researchers have proved that it's the primary mechanism. I realise that a lot of people don't need to be told - some researcher tells them that there is a link and they fill in the primary mechanism part in their imagination.

I'm not suggesting that CFC's shouldn't be banned, but you don't need to take it on faith that there're doomsday material.

Answer 8

One thing to remember, is that volcanic activity also spews millions of tons of gases into the atmosphere that destroy ozone. I don't remember where I read it, but the size of that blasted hole in the ozone layer over Antarctica would grow and shrink in relation to the activity level of the volcanoes down at the southern end of South America - Tierra del Fuego - "Land of the Fire"...

Answer 9

The "Ozone Hole" catastrophe wasn't one.

Not one person, or animal, was ever proven to have suffered as a result of the Antarctic Ozone Hole.

If you look at the record of what the "Ozone Hole" was, the advocates for action cherry picked the data to prove that the Ozone layer was "declining," and then screamed that only immediate action on CFCs could cause it's thickening.

If you look at the actual terrestrial UV levels, they never "increased" during the years of the "hole."

And now, on schedule, the Ozone is thickening (as it did BEFORE the cherry picked date the "hole" started) and you hear people screaming success!

The difference is, when the earth starts cooling before we've made any meaningful dent in "greenhouse gasses" you'll have nothing to point to that says "hurray for us!"

Answer 10

Yes I do,but you forgot to mention that volcano's do more harm then humans.You also left out that solar radiation bonds the molecules,by the way it's a very weak bond.You also have good and bad ozone and the hole has been constantly changing since being recorded.But do I think CFCs are good...no is the answer.

Answer 11

Paris Hilton critics - do you understand the science behind the hole in the ozone layer?

Don't you understand that a totally unrelated topic PROVES that Paris is an intellectual and all-round model citizen???