Ozone hole is shrinking

[Rhymes]

Article in french: http://www.lapresse.ca/article/20060518/CPACTUALITES/605180882&SearchID=7324511795951

Basically, since the montreal protocole, the ozone hole as been stable and since a couple of years it has even been shrinking! The results have been even better since the 1996 ban on CFC's.

This actually proves (for those still sceptical) that human behavior has a direct and short term effect on environment. It could become one more strong argument on the adoption of kyoto.

Good environmental news are rare, so relax and enjoy

 

[Tycoon101]

Tell Antartica to lay off the ozone hurting stuff, and the world may be able to patch the ozone together again.

Good thing that it's receding.

 

[Godwynn]

So does this mean that global warming is going to reverse?

 

[Rhymes]

So does this mean that global warming is going to reverse?

Actually the ozone hole and global warming aren't linked, one does not directly affect the other.

 

[Winner]

So does this mean that global warming is going to reverse?

No. Ozone layer is naturally regenerating, so when you stop destroying it, it will regenerate in few decades.

There were times in the history of Earth, when the ozone layer was almost completely wiped out by asteroid impacts.

Global warming is a different issue. Even if we stopped producing carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases, there is no guarantee that the trend would reverse. It would most probably take centuries.

 

[Reno]

Excelent news, however this is unlikely to get nations already against the Kyoto Accord to ratify it.

 

[Urederra]

This actually proves (for those still sceptical) that human behavior has a direct and short term effect on environment. It could become one more strong argument on the adoption of kyoto.

How come?

Actually the ozone hole and global warming aren't linked, one does not directly affect the other.

Doesn't last sentence contradict what you are saying in the OP?

The effect of the radicals derived from CFCs on O3 is a puntual chemical reaction, remove one of the reactants and you stop the reaction. In addition, CFCs are exclusively produced by human activity. It is a simple scenario.

Global warming is much more complicated stuff. there are multiple factors influencing the temperature on Earth, and we might not know all of them. Atmosferic CO2 levels, for example, don't depend exclusively of human activity, they also depend on multiple factors, not derived from human activity.

So, basically, you can not infer that since the measures taken to stop the ozone layer degradation are working, the measures subscribed in the Kyoto protocol are going to work.

 

[Lotus49]

While this seems like good news, I am still concerned about the health of the Ozone layer. While the hole may have shrunk, the overall density of the Ozone is still much less than it was in previous years, not even that long ago. Basically, it's still weakened. If the hole is shrinking - good, but I'll really be happy when/if the overall strength & density is restored. For all we know right now, the Ozone may have just shifted, to consolidate the large gap, but in reality the layer's health has not truly recovered much.

 

[Thorgalaeg]

Great news. However may the hole be shrinking becuase a difussion process? one of the basic laws in chemistry is difussion, it goes from high concentration areas to low concentration areas. I mean, some ozone from northern regions may be "moving" south, filling the ozone hole but decreasing world overall ozone density.

 

[Lotus49]

^Exactly what I was saying.

 

[FriendlyFire]

No. Ozone layer is naturally regenerating, so when you stop destroying it, it will regenerate in few decades.

1- Ozone is generated by the residual from lighting strikes / storms
Unless there are a huge number of violent storms I think it will take probably several centuries for it to be fully recovered.

 

[Thorgalaeg]

Yes and No. Ozone in the high atmospheric layers (the one forming the ozono layer) is continuosly generated from oxygene due to hard solar UV radiation. In low atmospheric layers near the ground Ozono is generated through several mechanisms, for instance storms, or urban air polution + solar UV radiation. However this tropospheric ozone does not protect us against space UV radiation since it remains near the ground and never diffuses to the high atmosphere.

 

[Aramazd]

1- Ozone is generated by the residual from lighting strikes / storms
Unless there are a huge number of violent storms I think it will take probably several centuries for it to be fully recovered.

While ozone is produced in those ways, the ozone in the upper atmosphere is caused by radiation from the sun breaking O2 atoms, which become ozone, which reacts with another ozone molecule to form 3 O2 molecules and then the process continues.

EDIT: Darn Thorgalaeg beat me to it.

 

[Cuivienen]

So does this mean that global warming is going to reverse?

They're completely unrelated (as people have said above), though often confused. The ozone layer just relates to UV light levels and thus sunburns.

The problem with the ozone was the result of chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), which were banned almost everwhere back in the mid-90s. However, it's taken some time for the CFCs already released into the atmosphere to begin to break down enough to allow the ozone layer to regenerate. Still, this shows that we can have an effect on the environment, and that effective and rapid action can curb the negative effects.

 

[vikingruler]

from what i understand the ozone layer is partly created from UV rays. But doesn't the ozone layer protect us from the UV rays?

 

[Abaddon]

Tell Antartica to lay off the ozone hurting stuff, and the world may be able to patch the ozone together again.

 

[Aramazd]

from what i understand the ozone layer is partly created from UV rays. But doesn't the ozone layer protect us from the UV rays?

Yes, UV rays hit O2 and split it into single oxygen atoms, which bond with O2 molecules that weren't split to form O3 or ozone, which breaks back down into O2 by this formula: 2 O3 -> 3 O2. The ozone layer prevents most UV rays from reaching us.

 

[Cuivienen]

The ozone hole is over Antarctica. (It's a joke.)

 

[Thorgalaeg]

The reaction of splitting O2 can absorb a determinated UV wavelength. But the important thing is that the same O3 molecule absorbs a wide range of dangerous UV radiations (at high altitudes ozone has long lifetime because molecules are very sparse and collitions among two O3 molecules to produce O2 are relatively rare).

 

[Rhymes]

How come?



Doesn't last sentence contradict what you are saying in the OP?

The effect of the radicals derived from CFCs on O3 is a puntual chemical reaction, remove one of the reactants and you stop the reaction. In addition, CFCs are exclusively produced by human activity. It is a simple scenario.

Global warming is much more complicated stuff. there are multiple factors influencing the temperature on Earth, and we might not know all of them. Atmosferic CO2 levels, for example, don't depend exclusively of human activity, they also depend on multiple factors, not derived from human activity.

So, basically, you can not infer that since the measures taken to stop the ozone layer degradation are working, the measures subscribed in the Kyoto protocol are going to work.

i give it to you its not a strong argument. But the point is, some people have the argument against Kyoto that human behavior cannot have an impact on such a large and complexe entity as a planet. This proves them wrong, it proves that our behavior can have an impact on the health of the panet.
If we have an impact on the Ozone, there are chances we have an impact on greenhouse effect too.