(be away from my usual lurking a few weeks and it's amazing what you miss...)
How about this... the reason that the Ozone hole is a current non-issue is that it IS a current non-issue?
The issue as stated is that the Ozone Hole has continued to grow after the banning of CFCs in the Montreal Protocol in 1987.
A couple of factors concerning this
1) It was never stated that banning the CFCs would immediately cause it to repair itself - there is a reservoir of CFCs and other chemicals in the upper atmosphere that will continue to destroy ozone for years to come. That reservoir needs to be exhausted before true recovery can occur. The average according to a couple of sites was about 30 years to completely get rid of current atmospheric CFCs... so, if CFCs had been completely banned in 1987, we'd still have CFCs in the atmosphere until 2017.
2) The Montreal Treaty didn't completely ban CFC's. There have been exemptions for differing chemicals granted to nations or an outright ignoring of treaty. Methyl bromide is still widely used as a pesticide - it was supposed to be banned by 2005, and it's still being used at about 40% of 1991 levels in the US.
3) There is a CFC black market. CFCs are less expensive and often work better than replacements - of course people are going to keep making and using them.
4) Global Warming (yes, an odd factor, but a factor non-the-less). Some of the models predict increased cold temperatures over central Antarctica, which have been observed. Increased ozone breakdown occurs the colder it gets.
5) Masking factors. CFCs were/are believed to be among the greatest causes of ozone breakdown. With them in the way, research to determine what other factors were also affecting ozone breakdown (volcanoes, sun) are much more difficult. Now that the CFC release is going down, it's easier to see what other factors might be involved - they may have had a larger effect than thought, but they were masked.
6) Repositories: Nations have bigger than expected stockpiles of CFC/CFC-like chemicals than thought. Those chemicals will leak/be released unless properly disposed of.
7) Time: People don't take the long view. Nasa models
EXPECT the Ozone Hole to show no signs of recovery at all until AT LEAST 2010. After 2010, if there's no signs of recovery, THEN I'd expect to see the ozone hole returning to public attention.
Finally...
As I've said on other boards - I really wish someone would send me my Secret Decoder Ring so I can join at least ONE of the great Science Conspiracies... I mean, there's Global Warming, Evolution, Men to the Moon, and all the others... *sniff* nobody wants me...![[Image: happy.gif]](http://www.ezboard.com/intl/aenglish/images/emoticons/happy.gif)
RMH
(For clarification: I am a molecular biologist, NOT a climate scientist. Therefore my opinions are just that, my opinions)
***
Bombeck's Rule of Medicine:
Never go to a doctor whose office plants have died.
How about this... the reason that the Ozone hole is a current non-issue is that it IS a current non-issue?
The issue as stated is that the Ozone Hole has continued to grow after the banning of CFCs in the Montreal Protocol in 1987.
A couple of factors concerning this
1) It was never stated that banning the CFCs would immediately cause it to repair itself - there is a reservoir of CFCs and other chemicals in the upper atmosphere that will continue to destroy ozone for years to come. That reservoir needs to be exhausted before true recovery can occur. The average according to a couple of sites was about 30 years to completely get rid of current atmospheric CFCs... so, if CFCs had been completely banned in 1987, we'd still have CFCs in the atmosphere until 2017.
2) The Montreal Treaty didn't completely ban CFC's. There have been exemptions for differing chemicals granted to nations or an outright ignoring of treaty. Methyl bromide is still widely used as a pesticide - it was supposed to be banned by 2005, and it's still being used at about 40% of 1991 levels in the US.
3) There is a CFC black market. CFCs are less expensive and often work better than replacements - of course people are going to keep making and using them.
4) Global Warming (yes, an odd factor, but a factor non-the-less). Some of the models predict increased cold temperatures over central Antarctica, which have been observed. Increased ozone breakdown occurs the colder it gets.
5) Masking factors. CFCs were/are believed to be among the greatest causes of ozone breakdown. With them in the way, research to determine what other factors were also affecting ozone breakdown (volcanoes, sun) are much more difficult. Now that the CFC release is going down, it's easier to see what other factors might be involved - they may have had a larger effect than thought, but they were masked.
6) Repositories: Nations have bigger than expected stockpiles of CFC/CFC-like chemicals than thought. Those chemicals will leak/be released unless properly disposed of.
7) Time: People don't take the long view. Nasa models
EXPECT the Ozone Hole to show no signs of recovery at all until AT LEAST 2010. After 2010, if there's no signs of recovery, THEN I'd expect to see the ozone hole returning to public attention.
Finally...
As I've said on other boards - I really wish someone would send me my Secret Decoder Ring so I can join at least ONE of the great Science Conspiracies... I mean, there's Global Warming, Evolution, Men to the Moon, and all the others... *sniff* nobody wants me...
RMH
(For clarification: I am a molecular biologist, NOT a climate scientist. Therefore my opinions are just that, my opinions)
***
Bombeck's Rule of Medicine:
Never go to a doctor whose office plants have died.