Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Scientists Baffled By Unknown Source of Ozone-Depleting Chemical

Posted by Soulskill on from the i-blame-the-schools dept.

schwit1 writes: Scientists have found that, despite a complete ban since 2007, ozone-depleting chemicals are still being pumped into the atmosphere from some unknown source. "Carbon tetrachloride (CCl4), which was once used in applications such as dry cleaning and as a fire-extinguishing agent, was regulated in 1987 under the Montreal Protocol along with other chlorofluorocarbons that destroy ozone and contribute to the ozone hole over Antarctica. Parties to the Montreal Protocol reported zero new CCl4 emissions between 2007-2012. However, the new research shows worldwide emissions of CCl4 average 39 kilotons (about 43,000 U.S. tons) per year, approximately 30 percent of peak emissions prior to the international treaty going into effect. "We are not supposed to be seeing this at all," said Qing Liang, an atmospheric scientist at NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland, and lead author of the study published online in the Aug. 18 issue of Geophysical Research Letters, a journal of the American Geophysical Union. "It is now apparent there are either unidentified industrial leakages, large emissions from contaminated sites, or unknown CCl4 sources."

18 of 303 comments (clear)

  1. Easy, India or China by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Who else would, unapologetically, give the middle finger to the environment?

    1. Re:Easy, India or China by iggymanz · · Score: 4, Insightful

      and I can think of a certain group of American Democrats who despite whatever noises they make at the end of the day are equally mega-corporate bitches same as the Republicans. Obama and 90% of Democrats in Congress for starters....

    2. Re:Easy, India or China by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Who else would, unapologetically, give the middle finger to the environment?

      Brazil, Mexico, Spain, Turkey, Egypt, Pakistan, US, UK, Sweden, Argentina, Australia, South Africa, Nigeria, Poland, and probably quite a few others.

      But not Canada. Canada would apologize.

    3. Re:Easy, India or China by Opportunist · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Can we just agree on greed being the culprit? Democrat, Republican, where's the difference? As long as there's money to be made by ignoring the law and as long as breaking a law and getting caught is cheaper than heeding it, greed trumps "doing the right thing" any time.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    4. Re:Easy, India or China by Dorianny · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I can think of a certain group of American Republicans who would do exactly that...

      Privately there are many Republicans that do believe in the scientific method and would like to see action on climate change but are reluctant to admit it because of fear of being labeled as traitors. On the Democratic camp there are many that realize that cap and trade, and so called "renewables" cannot be a complete solution to halting global warming but are simply afraid to support low or 0 carbon, but uncool power generation technologies, such as Nuclear for fear of being labeled the same.

    5. Re:Easy, India or China by Ralph+Wiggam · · Score: 5, Insightful

      So just because a bill is called the Clear Skies Act, you think it helps the environment and hurts corporations? Apparently you're the reason that consultants like Frank Luntz make the big bucks. My friend worked for him when he came up with that name. It was a total giveaway to corporate interests. That does nothing to contradict my post.

      Nixon was much more centrist and pragmatic on a lot of issues than people remember. Also, that EPA bill was passed by a Democratic Congress. The GOP really started their anti-environment push with Reagan- who immediately had the solar panels removed from the White House. It went into high gear starting in 1994 with Newt Gingrich.

    6. Re:Easy, India or China by geekoid · · Score: 4, Informative

      You should really read those links. Seriously dude, just linking something you don't actually understand as some sort of proof just mkas you look foolish.

      The first one made it worse:

      The law reduces air pollution controls, including those environmental protections of the Clean Air Act, including caps on toxins in the air and budget cuts for enforcement. The Act is opposed by conservationist groups such as the Sierra Club with Henry A. Waxman, a Democratic congressman of California, describing its title as "clear propaganda."

      Among other things, the Clear Skies Act:

      Allows 42 million more tons of pollution emitted than the EPA proposal.
      Weakens the current cap on nitrogen oxide pollution levels from 1.25 million tons to 2.1 million tons, allowing 68% more NOx pollution.
      Delays the improvement of sulfur dioxide (SO2) pollution levels compared to the Clean Air Act requirements.
      Delays enforcement of smog-and-soot pollution standards until 2015.
      By 2018, the Clear Skies Act will supposedly allow 3 million tons more NOx through 2012 and 8 million more by 2020, for SO2, 18 million tons more through 2012 and 34 million tons more through 2020. 58 tons more mercury through 2012 and 163 tons more through 2020 would be released into the environment than what would be allowed by enforcement of the Clean Air Act.[2]

      In August 2001, the EPA proposed a version of the Clear Skies Act that contained short timetables and lower emissions caps [3]. It is unknown why this proposal was withdrawn and replaced with the Bush Administration proposal. It is also unclear whether or not the original EPA proposal would have made it out of committee.

      The second one--Signed into law by President Lyndon B. Johnson on December 17, 1963

      The third one-- Nixon combined existing groups into one, for budget reasons.
      However, I would argue the the Pubs of the 60's and 70s are vastly different then the pubs of today. Post religious right control.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    7. Re:Easy, India or China by Wootery · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The Government is basically the worst possible nightmare-scenario giant monopoly evil corporation you can imagine.

      Here in the UK, our government has taken steps to prevent there being a monopoly ISP. They didn't start a government-run ISP, they just regulated things to prevent a monopoly. And... it worked. Not all government intervention means shifting things from the private to the public sector. If anything, I imagine there are now more ISP jobs than there would be with a monopoly.

      Also, we don't have to suffer truly godawful ISPs, the way you do in the US, which is nice.

      But no, you'll go on believing all that government does is evil (that might not be such a worry if it weren't for that your system allows payments that would be classified as bribery in damn near any other country, btw), and that there's no better way to run a country than by letting corporations screw over the average person.

    8. Re:Easy, India or China by Tyrannicsupremacy · · Score: 5, Informative

      And it worked? No, you just have a censored internet. http://www.csmonitor.com/Innov...

      --
      http://i.cubeupload.com/T6cyLu.png
  2. Old drums leak by Noir+Angellus · · Score: 4, Insightful

    and there are a lot of old drums of this stuff sitting around old industrial buildings because it costs money to have it disposed of safely. There's probably a degree of it being released by the new generation of workers who have no idea what's in those old rusty drums, and the older workers have plain forgotten, and are just dumping it into drains to get rid of it and make space in the chemical storage room.

  3. Source is HVAC Contractors by fibrewire · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I know because it's happening all over the Coachella Valley. I have seen cut rate guys NOT reclaiming or pumping down coils - jettisoning 10+ pounds each time. This occurs at least 50 times a day here in the desert that I know of. Even top paid contractors like callthegeneral.com just don't care because their commission is based on number of visits per day, and it takes an extra 15-25 minutes to pump a system down before removal. The wholesale houses even pay a couple $$$ per pound of the reclaimed stuff, but commission rates ensure blowing off straight to atmosphere every time.

    1. Re:Source is HVAC Contractors by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 4, Informative

      Nope. CCl4 is not used in HVAC systems. You are thinking of freon, which is not what TFA is about.

    2. Re:Source is HVAC Contractors by Nethemas+the+Great · · Score: 4, Informative

      CCl4 otherwise known as R-10 in the HVAC world, is a coolant and is a precursor to R-11 and R-12. Both of which happily decompose to CCl4.

      --
      Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once ... with negative results.
    3. Re:Source is HVAC Contractors by Rich0 · · Score: 4, Informative

      When I open up the tap in my kitchen sink, am I "blowing off water straight to atmosphere" ??? Of course not, showing us all that you didnt know that Carbon tetrachloride was a liquid while making your first post blaming a bunch of people that you clearly have other different issues with.

      Saying that something is a liquid/solid/gas/etc is a bit of a simplification. The reality is that substances exist in equilibrium between various phases, and this shifts based on temperature/pressure.

      If you spill some water on a sidewalk in the summer and come back an hour later, you won't see any water, because it will evaporate - probably fairly quickly depending on the humidity.

      Carbon tetrachloride is much more volatile than water in practice. The boiling point isn't all that much lower, but unlike water there is almost none of it present in the atmosphere to start out. That greatly facilitates evaporation per Le Chatelier's principle.

      Oh, and I don't think anybody uses carbon tetrachloride in air conditioners. Old ones certainly use CFCs though, and most of those boil at a lower temperature. Carbon tetrachloride has been a known carcinogen for ages, so industrial uses have been shifting away from it for a while.

  4. No data, so choose your favorite villain by Mostly+a+lurker · · Score: 4, Funny

    Since the source is completely unclear, most posters will blindly assume it is the fault of whichever group is their bête noire. Some favorites will likely be China, North Korea and Russia, but use your imagination folks. There is just as much evidence that it is caused by evil bankers, genetically modified foods, pedophiles or US militarism.

  5. From the wikipedia by mveloso · · Score: 4, Informative

    Not sure how accurate this is, since it's from wikipedia, but the reference seems legit.

    In 2008, a study of common cleaning products found the presence of carbon tetrachloride in "very high concentrations" (up to 101 mg/m3) as a result of manufacturers' mixing of surfactants or soap with sodium hypochlorite (bleach).[18]

    http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10...

    FTA:

    "By mixing surfactants or soap with NaOCl, it was shown that the formation of carbon tetrachloride and several other halogenated VOCs is possible"

    1. Re:From the wikipedia by Smallpond · · Score: 4, Informative

      Clorox had $5.6B in sales last year, of which 10% was laundry products according to their annual report. A gallon of bleach sells for $2, so if all their sales generated 275M gallons of bleach-containing chemicals = 1M m3 x 101 mg/m3 = 100,000 gm. Nope. That amount is negligible compared to what the study reports.

  6. Re:china did it by Narcocide · · Score: 5, Funny

    Its called "setting a bad example." This got my little sister out of trouble almost every single time.