Slashdot Mirror
Ozone Hole Getting Smaller
snark42 writes "According to Reuters and some other sources the hole in the ozone layer shrank 20% this year to a mere 9 million square miles. Of course scientists caution this would have to continue for at least a couple more years to be a trend or anything to get excited about."
20 years from now, we'll have discovered there's a natural grow/shrink cycle we never knew about...
While this is good news, I hope it isn't seen by governments as an excuse to ease their environmental burdens in favour of bowing to economic/corporate pressures, and, I really hope it isn't seen as yet another excuse by the US government to duck out for even longer on signing the Kyoto Accords.
I realize the above accords don't directly affect the ozone layer, but, ask anyone on the street - the hole in the Ozone layer and the "Greenhouse Effect" are the same thing right? Maybe the hole lets more heat in or something...
It is a sad state of affairs when one feels so cynical, that the first thing that occurs when a hint of good news comes along, is, how will those in power exploit this?
This may be a stupid question *but*...
Why can't we 'reseed' the ozone layer? We can make ozone in a lab, so why don't we get some high flying aircraft and strap some ozone filled bottles to the fuselage and start spraying? It'd be like dusting crops only a lot different.
Although, it is good news that the hole is smaller.
Reporting this suggests everything will be OK in 5 years - 20% in a year - just 80% to go hey!!
... certainly 20 years, actually I never claimed.' 'THANK you very much its 8:59 time for traffic'
Of course this could be nothing to do with anything - and simply be an anomoly, a measuring error, a rogue reading, or true. Until everyone has a basic degree of scientific understanding this kind of news will hit the headlines and be presented as a Good Thing. Which is isn't - its neither good not bad.
A bit like the medical researcher on the radio every few weeks being introduced as talking about a 'newfound cure for cancer' and saying 'this is certainly an exciting development' being asked 'so when will it actually be used to cure cancer' and having to say 'well... possibly never,
International accords have acted to reduce the amount of CFCs being released into the atmosphere. These are the pollutants that affect the chemical ozone cycle. So a decreases in them would permit ozone to stick around. People in Antarctica do get sunburnt very easily, as do people in new zealand and chile when the hole is over their region. Chile has many school programs preventing children from going outside during hole episodes.
Interesting how Freon became dangerous right after DuPont's patent on it expired. There is nothing new under the Sun.
One CPU cycle wasted on digital restrictions management is ONE TOO MANY.
Please tell me how exempting the fastest growing, most poluting economy on the face of the planet will make one bit of difference.
Progress that's not all-encompassing still continues to be progress.
~jeff
Because ozone is created by the interaction of O2 and UV radiation. It's not some finite mass of rare elements. It's O3. The reason it's "coming back" is that human activity has a negligible effect upon it. The "hole" is a cyclical phenomenon more closely related to solar activity than anything else.
If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
The entire planet didn't. China still uses very large amounts of CFCs.
...
An example, google for more.
THE PROCESS TO phase out the use of CFCs in polyurethanes from the 1,000 or more foam factories in China has started to accelerate.
The phase-out is being undertaken in accordance with the Montreal Protocol, which established a timetable for developing countries to phase out the use of CFCs by the year 2010. With financial support from the Multilateral Fund supplied by the United Nations, it is estimated that about 10% of Chinese foam processors have now substituted CFCs with other foaming agents, such as pentane, C[O.sub.2] and water. Companies that have completed
The Earth is fairly resillient, much more so than we humans are. The Earth will survive just about anything we do to it, but we are at risk. The argument that there are no (or minimal) dangers ignores the fact that skin cancer exists. It ignores the fact that there is a hole in the ozone. The Montreal Protocol has been a major step forward to eliminating/minimizing those chemicals that we know deplete the Ozone layer.
The other thing that may contribute to the Ozone layer growing back would be global warming, as the ozone depletion effect requires very cold temperatures to do the spectacular damage it has done to the pole. (see Univeristy of Cambridge.)
Some interesting facts:
InnerWeb
Freud might say that Intelligent Design is religion's ID.
uhzzz.....do a little research please ozone is created when UV light from the sun strikes O2 (oxygen you breathe) and forms 2 O3 (ozone) from 3 O2. Magical isn't it?
-- Checking emails and kicking cheats `till the day I die.
Generally, it takes Aqua-net approximately 15 years to escape the earth's atmosphere. The residual Aqua-net from 1980's groups like the Cure and Poisen , as well as teenage girls, who are now fat 30-somethings, has escaped the stratosphere. So long as fashion trends to not revert to high bangs and glam-band hair... we will survive.
We plan to allow the UV/ozone/oxygen balance to reach equilibrium by not destroying it any more with pollution. That means letting volcanic CFCs consume the excess ozone that might otherwise poison us or something else in our energy/food chain. We evolved to live in a balanced environment that flucuates within a window kept stable by overlapping natural cycles. When we change that balance, that environment, too quickly, by boosting one of the cycles to the detriment of another, we are no longer as fit to survive in the new environment. In related news, we also plan to allow various species to reproduce before hunting them to extinction, so we can continue to eat them.
--
make install -not war
Why do you think that China is the most polluting economy? Of course having ~1 billion inhabitants it is going to be quite high up there, but the worlds most polluting economy must in all fairness said to be the US, where 4% of the worlds population produce 25% of the worlds greenhouse gases (according to this link)
Of course wikipedia tells us that China comes second.
And where did you get the idea that China is the worlds largest polluter - "common knowledge" is that it is the US by a long golden chalk.
I stand corrected, I was just wandering around trying to find a reference to to worlds worst polluter and had great difficulty finding it. This material just isn't that commonly available - people not interested in it?
After great effort, I found this which contains the phrase "China is the second-biggest producer of greenhouse gases, after the United States".
This is also worth a read - containing the line:
Furthermore, the U.S. for over 20 to 25 percent of the world's carbon dioxide emissions, for just 4 to 5 percent of the world's population.
I strongly agree with jeffehobbs above though, progress is progress with or without the US, China (which I didn't realize to my own discredit) and India (apparently).
Ok, on to the next conspiracy...
Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government.
Science has not, nor will it ever save my life. I am going to die, and science can not stop that. We're all dying.
Yes, but science has greatly increased the lifespan and quality of life of the average person. Unless you don't consider that worthwhile...
It's like the housewife who goes to the mall to buy several pairs of shoes. "I saved fifteen dollars!" "Yes dear, but you spent $70."
If she was going to buy the shoes regardless if they were on sale, then she did save $15.
People's desire to believe they are right is much stronger than their desire to be right.
... russia only approved the Kyoto Protocol just yesterday!
This is my sig. There are thousands more, but this one is mine.
We did? Who's "we"? The US stopped in 1996, but China is still cranking out tons of the stuff, and doesn't plan to have it phased out for TEN MORE YEARS. Furthermore, it's not the production of CFC's that release them into the atmosphere-- it's the venting of it from leaks in CFC-using equipment . It'll take at LEAST 10 years before we see a significant reduction in CFC venting due to equipment replacement.
If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
Highlander II already said this in 1991.
So, lemmie get this straight:
The hole gets 2% bigger, scientists freak out, instantly blaming pollution and saying we need to change. Then, when the hole shrinks by 20%, "scientists caution this would have to continue for at least a couple more years to be a trend or anything to get excited about."
Is it just me, or does it seem these scientists are protraying the facts in such a way to continue their funding?
Could this have something to do with the increasing collapse of ice shelves in the Antarctic? Perhaps there is some relationship between the Ozone hole beginning to shrink and the collapse of the Larsen B Ice Shelf, which both coincidentally happened in 2002. Maybe the collapse and accellerated glacier movements triggered some environmental chain reaction that affected the Ozone hole, but in a superficial way that temporarily masks a continued climate change.
The fact that Bush is scared just shows how much of a plan he has for economic growth.
Lars T.
To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck
Of course scientists caution this would have to continue for at least a couple more years to be a trend or anything to get excited about.
Isn't it funny that when there is good news about the climate, "scientists" tells us that we shouldn't "get excited about it," yet when there is apparently bad news, these same scientists demands that we must act "before it's too late."