http://www.montrealgazette.com/life/green-guide/scientists+ozone+layer+depletion+stopped/3535408/story.html
GENEVA - The protective ozone layer in the earth's upper atmosphere has stopped thinning and should largely be restored by mid century thanks to a ban on harmful chemicals, UN scientists said on Thursday.
The "Scientific Assessment of Ozone Depletion 2010" report said a 1987 international treaty that phased out chlorofluorocarbons (CFC) -- substances used in refrigerators, aerosol sprays and some packing foams --- had been successful.
Ozone provides a natural protective filter against harmful ultra-violet rays from the sun, which can cause sunburn, cataracts and skin cancer as well as damage vegetation.
First observations of a seasonal ozone hole appearing over the Antarctic occurred in the 1970s and the alarm was raised in the 1980s after it was found to be worsening under the onslaught of CFCs, prompting 196 countries to join the Montreal Protocol.
"The Montreal Protocol signed in 1987 to control ozone depleting substances is working, it has protected us from further ozone depletion over the past decades," said World Meteorological Organisation head of research Len Barrie.
"Global ozone, including ozone in the polar region is not longer decreasing but not yet increasing," he told journalists.
The 300 scientists who compiled the four yearly ozone assessment now expect that the ozone layer in the stratosphere will be restored to 1980 levels in 2045 to 2060, according to the report, "slightly earlier" than expected.
Although CFCs have been phased out, they accumulated and persist in the atmosphere and the effect of the curbs takes years to filter through.
The ozone hole over the South Pole, which varies in size and is closely monitored when it appears in springtime each year, is likely to persist even longer and may even be aggravated by climate change, the report said.
Scientists are still getting to grips with the complex interaction between ozone depletion and global warming, Barrie explained.
"In the Antarctic, the impact of the ozone hole and the surface climate is becoming evident," he said.
"This leads to important changes in surface temperature and wind patterns, amongst other environmental changes," Barrie added.
CFCs are classified among greenhouse gases that cause global warming, so the phase out "provided substantial co-benefits by reducing climate change," the report found.
Barrie estimated that it had avoided about 10 gigatonnes of such emissions a year.
However, the ozone-friendly substances that have replaced CFCs in plastics or as refrigerants - hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs) and hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) -- are also powerful greenhouse gases.
HFCs alone are regarded as 14,000 times more powerful than carbon dioxide (CO2), which is the focus of international efforts to tackle climate change, and HFC emissions are growing by eight percent a year, according to UN agencies.
"This represents a further potential area for action within the overall climate change challenge," said UN Environment Programme chief Achim Steiner in a statement.
Comments
Well yeah of course we have some effect but I dont think it's how some of the environmental whack jobs make it out to be. Some people make it sound like that movie the day after tomorrow is 10 years away when its not. I just dont honestly think were having that profound of an effect on the world. Especially when I see a guy like Al Gore hype up the whole issue then bam there in a huge mcmansion with private jets all from the money by the poor saps that bought into his scare propaganda.
This is true. It just seems like the pro global warming people are the ones getting wealthy off the scare tactics.
The scientists said humans were the cause of the problem :facepalm:.
I can guarantee you if man destroys earth it wont be because of our cars and aerosol's. Just follow the money with all this global warming environmental non sense and it all becomes pretty clear whats really happening.
if you truly believe that CFCs didn't contributes to ozone depletion, then you are retarded
case and point
i'm not surprised that someone who sounds so arrogant and ignorant has the confederate battle flag as his avatar and links the KKK in his signature
scum
U mad? Anyway I'm not saying humans have no effect on our environment but I do not believe were causing this catastrophe that the liberals keep talking about. Global warming and all this is normal throughout the world history. You cant deny the wealth of someone like Al Gore didn't have to do with lies and exaggerations about the environment. Humans will not destroy the world with our cars trust me. I also like how questioning global warming makes me scum.:rolleyes:
So we're still melting but at least we dont have to worry about cataracts :rolleyes:
Were not melting. The temperature goes up a fucking tenth of a degree and the libs freak.
I don't think you need to exaggerate climate change to be worried about it. I mean, chances are that most of us will only experience price changes on various goods, but people living in certain regions will have to move due to changing water levels, and the third world is going to experience an amazing shitstorm that will probably translate into floods of poor, homeless immigrants for people living in more developed regions.
However you look at it it's going to suck and it'd be cool to try and avoid/lessen it.
EDIT: But it's cool that the Ozone layer is alright again. Now we won't have to experience 98% more ultraviolet rays. :thumbsup:
Except the hole in the Ozone layer is/was real, as scientists had been studying and measuring it for a long time.
And it would be a really big deal if more holes were to form, as the majority of the suns ionizing radiation would no longer be absorbed by the upper layers of our atmosphere. They would come straight through and usher in a new age of skin cancer and radiation-related deformities and defects. The sun ain't nothing to fuck with.
Some people are getting rich from it, so fucking what? People are going to get rich no matter what initiatives are proposed. I'd rather those who care for our planet to have money and power, as opposed to those who don't give a fuck.
About the scale of the effect humans have. Nobody knows. But is it really worth gambling the future of our planet just for a little bit of luxury?
Finally, anything which increases efficiency of resources should be encouraged.
1. CCl3F+UV light -> CCL2F + Cl then
2. Cl + O3 (ozone) -> ClO + O2 then
3. ClO + O -> Cl + O2
4. Step two is repeated
5. Step three is repeated
You can see why this is incredibly dangerous to have reactive free radicals jumping around from reaction to reaction without inhibition. Studies have shown each Cl molecule participates (on average) in 100,000 of these O3 destroying reactions. It is a good thing we permabanned this shit because we came preeeetty close to widespread die offs.
Also who would even know their use was stopped? We still have aerosols and things worked as they used to, we just aren't fucking the atmosphere with them anymore...or at least to the same extent.
How that equates to making someone rich I don't know.
That was all about the chemicals (ChlorofFuoroCarbon's) we used in cooling devices being released into the atmosphere, reacting with O3 and breking it down.
We banned them, mainly because there was better cheaper alternatives - nothing to do with 'the common good', and it fixed itself.
I had the equation memorised a while back but i've forgotten it now. ( EDIT: it's in an above post)
Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control gave a directive to cease their use
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chlorofluorocarbon#Phase_out_of_CFCs