Started By
Message
locked post

AP News: Scientists say the ozone layer is recovering

Posted on 9/10/14 at 9:03 pm
Posted by BeYou
DFW
Member since Oct 2012
6025 posts
Posted on 9/10/14 at 9:03 pm
LINK

quote:

WASHINGTON (AP) - Earth's protective ozone layer is beginning to recover, largely because of the phase-out since the 1980s of certain chemicals used in refrigerants and aerosol cans, a U.N. scientific panel reported Wednesday in a rare piece of good news about the health of the planet.

Scientists said the development demonstrates that when the world comes together, it can counteract a brewing ecological crisis.

For the first time in 35 years, scientists were able to confirm a statistically significant and sustained increase in stratospheric ozone, which shields the planet from solar radiation that causes skin cancer, crop damage and other problems.

From 2000 to 2013, ozone levels climbed 4 percent in the key mid-northern latitudes at about 30 miles up, said NASA scientist Paul A. Newman. He co-chaired the every-four-years ozone assessment by 300 scientists, released at the United Nations.

"It's a victory for diplomacy and for science and for the fact that we were able to work together," said chemist Mario Molina. In 1974, Molina and F. Sherwood Rowland wrote a scientific study forecasting the ozone depletion problem. They won the 1995 Nobel Prize in chemistry for their work.

The ozone layer had been thinning since the late 1970s. Man-made chlorofluorocarbons, called CFCs, released chlorine and bromine, which destroyed ozone molecules high in the air. After scientists raised the alarm, countries around the world agreed to a treaty in 1987 that phased out CFCs. Levels of those chemicals between 30 and 50 miles up are decreasing.

The United Nations calculated in an earlier report that without the pact, by 2030 there would have been an extra 2 million skin cancer cases a year around the world.

Paradoxically, heat-trapping greenhouse gases - considered the major cause of global warming - are also helping to rebuild the ozone layer, Newman said. The report said rising levels of carbon dioxide and other gases cool the upper stratosphere, and the cooler air increases the amount of ozone.

And in another worrisome trend, the chemicals that replaced CFCs contribute to global warming and are on the rise, said MIT atmospheric scientist Susan Solomon. At the moment, they don't make much of a dent, but they are expected to increase dramatically by 2050 and make "a big contribution" to global warming.

The ozone layer is still far from healed. The long-lasting, ozone-eating chemicals still lingering in the atmosphere create a yearly fall ozone hole above the extreme Southern Hemisphere, and the hole hasn't closed up. Also, the ozone layer is still about 6 percent thinner than in 1980, by Newman's calculations.

Ozone levels are "on the upswing, but it's not there yet," he said.

Achim Steiner, executive director of the U.N. Environment Program, said there are encouraging signs that the ozone layer "is on track to recovery by the middle of this century."

Steiner called the effort to get rid of ozone-destroying substances "one of the great success stories of international collective action in addressing a global environmental change phenomenon."

"More than 98 percent of the ozone-depleting substances agreed over time have actually been phased out," he said. If not for such efforts, Steiner said, "we would be seeing a very substantial global ozone depletion today."

Paul Wapner, a professor of global environmental politics at American University, said the findings are "good news in an often dark landscape" and send a message of hope to world leaders meeting later this month in New York for a U.N. climate summit.

"The precedent is truly important because society is facing another serious global environmental problem, namely climate change," said Molina, a professor in San Diego and Mexico City. The 71-year-old scientist said he didn't think he would live to see the day that the ozone layer was rebuilding.

Earlier this week, the United Nations announced that atmospheric levels of the main greenhouse gas, carbon dioxide, surged to another record high in 2013. The increase from 2012 was the biggest jump in three decades.
Posted by WildcatMike
Lexington, KY
Member since Dec 2005
41546 posts
Posted on 9/10/14 at 9:04 pm to
But Tuba said different
Posted by Scoop
RIP Scoop
Member since Sep 2005
44583 posts
Posted on 9/10/14 at 9:05 pm to
Does this mean I can start using Aquanet again?
Posted by Scruffy
Kansas City
Member since Jul 2011
72103 posts
Posted on 9/10/14 at 9:06 pm to
This was known years ago.
Posted by Zahrim
McCamey Texas
Member since Mar 2009
7667 posts
Posted on 9/10/14 at 9:07 pm to




Posted by CamdenTiger
Member since Aug 2009
62439 posts
Posted on 9/10/14 at 9:10 pm to
Damn, now we gonna freeze our arses off this Winter..
Posted by SpidermanTUba
my house
Member since May 2004
36128 posts
Posted on 9/10/14 at 9:15 pm to
quote:

But Tuba said different


No I didn't. You're a liar. The recovery of the ozone layer is an excellent example of environmental regulation at work. You would know this if you had the brain cells to read the first sentence of the OP.
quote:


Earth's protective ozone layer is beginning to recover, largely because of the phase-out since the 1980s of certain chemicals used in refrigerants and aerosol cans,




quote:


The ozone layer had been thinning since the late 1970s. Man-made chlorofluorocarbons, called CFCs, released chlorine and bromine, which destroyed ozone molecules high in the air. After scientists raised the alarm, countries around the world agreed to a treaty in 1987 that phased out CFCs. Levels of those chemicals between 30 and 50 miles up are decreasing.

This post was edited on 9/10/14 at 9:19 pm
Posted by WeeWee
Member since Aug 2012
40136 posts
Posted on 9/10/14 at 9:20 pm to
quote:

No I didn't. You're a liar. The recovery of the ozone layer is an excellent example of environmental regulation at work. You would know this if you had the brain cells to read the first sentence of the OP.


the regulation only worked because there were economically viable alternatives to use. If you outlawed fossil fuels, the only way to stop manmade CO2 emmission, we would all die.
Posted by SpidermanTUba
my house
Member since May 2004
36128 posts
Posted on 9/10/14 at 9:28 pm to
quote:



the regulation only worked because there were economically viable alternatives to use.


Funny how the alternatives to CFCs weren't "economically viable" enough until big mean government phased CFCs out. Interesting coincidence, wouldn't you say? Its almost as if the market responded to the regulation by producing the economically viable alternatives!

Lets suppose the market failed to produce the alternative. You would prefer we all die of skin cancer?

quote:

If you outlawed fossil fuels, the only way to stop manmade CO2 emmission, we would all die.



cap&trade doesn't outlaw fossil fuels. Please stop being ignorant.





This post was edited on 9/10/14 at 9:30 pm
Posted by Powerman
Member since Jan 2004
162225 posts
Posted on 9/10/14 at 9:30 pm to
quote:



the regulation only worked because there were economically viable alternatives to use. If you outlawed fossil fuels, the only way to stop manmade CO2 emmission, we would all die.


Right...but no one of any importance is advocating that we outlaw fossil fuels.

So pretty much an irrelevant statement.
Posted by WeeWee
Member since Aug 2012
40136 posts
Posted on 9/10/14 at 9:31 pm to
quote:

cap&trade doesn't outlaw fossil fuels. Please stop being ignorant.


and it doesn't work either. See my earlier thread US CO2 emission drops are greater than europe's and we don't have cap and trade so liberals come up with a new solution.
Posted by SpidermanTUba
my house
Member since May 2004
36128 posts
Posted on 9/10/14 at 9:56 pm to
quote:


and it doesn't work either.


It does.

LINK

quote:

See my earlier thread US CO2 emission drops are greater than europe's and we don't have cap and trade so liberals come up with a new solution.



But I thought it would be economically devastating to use less CO2? Are you saying that's no longer the case? Let me know when you make up your mind.


quote:


The large decrease in 2012 was mainly due to a decrease
in the use of coal (mostly used in power generation).
LINK

Looks like there are economically viable alternatives to coal! So by your logic, its OK if we phase it out now, right?
This post was edited on 9/10/14 at 10:00 pm
Posted by GeeOH
Louisiana
Member since Dec 2013
13376 posts
Posted on 9/10/14 at 9:59 pm to
quote:

This was known years ago.


There measure every 4 years, so yes, 4 years ago it was known as well.
Posted by Teddy Ruxpin
Member since Oct 2006
39582 posts
Posted on 9/10/14 at 10:04 pm to
So I won't need Sunblock 5000 after all?

LINK
Posted by Zahrim
McCamey Texas
Member since Mar 2009
7667 posts
Posted on 9/10/14 at 10:12 pm to
not yet Teddy, but soon.......
Posted by Tigah in the ATL
Atlanta
Member since Feb 2005
27539 posts
Posted on 9/10/14 at 10:12 pm to
quote:

If you outlawed fossil fuels, the only way to stop manmade CO2 emmission, we would all die.


Because the answer is none or all.
Posted by mmcgrath
Indianapolis
Member since Feb 2010
35398 posts
Posted on 9/10/14 at 10:15 pm to
quote:

the regulation only worked because there were economically viable alternatives to use.
Actually, both of you are a little right. The Ozone treaties take into account certain uses for which there isn't a viable alternative yet and allow continued use in certain cases. But money is used to both push for alternatives as well as compensate some countries for the added expenses.

I have read through a number of the reports on the UN site as well as the individual case reports. Really a fantastic example of why the UN is a valuable tool that shouldn't be totally dismissed by dummies.
Posted by Big Scrub TX
Member since Dec 2013
33403 posts
Posted on 9/10/14 at 10:17 pm to
quote:

Steiner called the effort to get rid of ozone-destroying substances "one of the great success stories of international collective action in addressing a global environmental change phenomenon."


So, we're in agreement that the government stepping in and banning certain things is what led to the ozone layer recovering? Or are we denying that it was ever being depleted, and thus it was just government run amok?
Posted by Tigah in the ATL
Atlanta
Member since Feb 2005
27539 posts
Posted on 9/10/14 at 10:22 pm to
quote:

Or are we denying that it was ever being depleted, and thus it was just government run amok?
there are probably some here who do.

More likely are the anarcho-capitalists who think they have a solution to this type of thing when they really do not.
Posted by vodkacop
Louisiana
Member since Nov 2008
7855 posts
Posted on 9/10/14 at 10:23 pm to
Damn those old blue hairs and strippers for destroying our ozone.
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 4Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram