Restoration of the Ozone Layer Is Back on Track, Scientists Say (nytimes.com) 34
The protective ozone layer in the upper atmosphere could be restored within several decades, scientists said Monday, as recent rogue emissions of ozone-depleting chemicals from China have been largely eliminated. From a report: In a United Nations-sponsored assessment, the scientists said that global emissions of CFC-11, a banned chemical that has been used as a refrigerant and in insulating foams, had declined since 2018 after increasing for several years. CFC-11 and similar chemicals, collectively called chlorofluorocarbons, destroy ozone, which blocks ultraviolet radiation from the sun that can cause skin cancer and otherwise harm people and other living things. The scientists said that if current policies remained in place, ozone levels between the polar regions should reach pre-1980 levels by 2040. Ozone holes, or regions of greater depletion that appear regularly near the South Pole and, less frequently, near the North Pole, should also recover, by 2045 in the Arctic and about 2066 in Antarctica.
"Things continue to trend in the right direction," said Stephen A. Montzka, a research chemist with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and one of the report's authors. Dr. Montzka led a 2018 study that alerted the world that CFC-11 emissions had been increasing since 2012 and that they appeared to come from East Asia. Investigations by The New York Times and others strongly suggested that small factories in Eastern China disregarding the global ban were the source. The new emissions had threatened to undermine the Montreal Protocol, the treaty negotiated in the 1980s to phase out the use of chlorofluorocarbons in favor of more benign chemicals after it was discovered that chlorofluorocarbons were depleting atmospheric ozone.
"Things continue to trend in the right direction," said Stephen A. Montzka, a research chemist with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and one of the report's authors. Dr. Montzka led a 2018 study that alerted the world that CFC-11 emissions had been increasing since 2012 and that they appeared to come from East Asia. Investigations by The New York Times and others strongly suggested that small factories in Eastern China disregarding the global ban were the source. The new emissions had threatened to undermine the Montreal Protocol, the treaty negotiated in the 1980s to phase out the use of chlorofluorocarbons in favor of more benign chemicals after it was discovered that chlorofluorocarbons were depleting atmospheric ozone.
Re: (Score:3)
I don't think anyone want to deal with a problem that you can't push to the next administration.
CFC is a way too fast acting issue to be able to just pretend it's not there or pretend you're doing something to fix it.
Proof... (Score:4, Insightful)
.. that if can get our collective heads out of our arses we can fix this.
And, I remember all the same arguments about why the Montreal Protocol shouldn't be implemented being argued now. Most of them whiny-arse BS from corporations about increased costs, too much government control/oversight, sky falling, blah blah blah.
DOW and BASF's numbers look just fine.
Re: (Score:3)
And, I remember all the same arguments
I remember all the arguments that you can't trust China to abide by international treaties. The satellites that discovered their CFC plumes say nothing about all the other treaty requirements they're flouting.
Re: Proof... (Score:1)
wait... you reply to a comment about corporate sarcasm with a lame attempt at sarcasm in attempt to slam China, all while the article says China followed suit... even if one of last... I honestly don't know how to do real with you shits, you honestly want another war justified on Sino bigotry... hope you get your wish.
Re: (Score:3)
China followed suit
You can't "do real" that's what you think. China got caught. If they hadn't gotten caught it would still be going on now.
Re:Proof... (Score:5, Insightful)
And the astonishing thing is the Montreal Protocol was signed and put in action by then-Conservatives (UK/Thatcher, USA/Reagan and Canada/Mulroney).
It was timely action based on scientific evidence, and it is working ...
Today's conservatives have very different priorities, and have a very different stance towards science.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Today's conservatives have very different priorities, and have a very different stance towards science.
Some would argue that people that lie incessantly, try to overthrow the government, find themselves incapable to cooperate with others and are good at destruction but bad at building things and refuse to see things as they are, are not "conservatives" at all because they are missing most/all conservative core values. I think that argument has merit and a lot of those we see calling themselves "conservatives" is really a more-or-less openly violent cave-man type mob that wants to own and dictate everything,
The lesson here is that (Score:5, Insightful)
Let’s not kid ourselves. That’s so 30 years ago. Nowadays, there would be “ozone-hole” deniers elected to the highest offices of the most powerful countries, the “ozone lobby” would be spreading disinformation, and Fox News would be running stories about how the liberal fake-ozone-hole cult is a threat to democracy. Nothing would get done.
Yes, I’m getting old and cynical. Get off my lawn. Oops, wait, it’s now a patch of desert. Get off my saguaro patch, punk.
Re: (Score:2)
Snicker, see next post, there's your "ozone-hole" denier, SumDog. My guess is when he goes to doctor and the doctor tells him he's going to die, he questions whether death is really a thing.
Re: (Score:3)
Pretty much this. Back then there was no way for corporations to reach the "muh freedumz" dimwits to become their spokespeople against their own interests, today, you'd be flooded with anti-science bullshit, from ozone-hole denialism to outright claims that ozone is bad (and actually, you don't want it near you, that's even true) and thus we should be happy that that shit is finally gone.
Re: (Score:2)
Unfortunately, that is pretty much how things seem to work today.
Re: I dunno... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
New Zealand is closer and has the second highest and generally not conducive to being outside most of the time, however from https://www.solbari.com.au/blo... [solbari.com.au] however Norway, Denmark and Netherlands are the next in line and are far from the south pole. I know there was is a temporary hole in the north pole but it may also have something to do a large portion of the population being white.
Re: I dunno... (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
That's scary. I had one severe sunburn when I was younger from canoeing down a river. I put on sunscreen but I missed some spots on my back and you could see what was protected and what was not. Also, I did not wear a shirt which I regretted. Of course I didn't feel it until later. We were on the river for a few hours. I'd hate to think of it being 4 times as bad.
I had a few other sunburns, but nothing like that. The last one I got was from hiking in the mountains. I wear a hat now.
Re: (Score:2)
You should question your sanity instead. There does not seem to be a lot of it. You need to be in denial on flat-earther level to seriously believe the ozone hole is not real.
Easy fix (Score:2)
Registration Required/Paywall (Score:2)
Slashdot is putting more and more registration required/paywall articles up. Heads up this sucks.
At least put the warning or provide the option to filter these out. I'd prefer just not to see these articles.
Re: (Score:2)
Or do the suck less approach of finding a non-paywall/registration site.
Surely this is what editors are meant to do?
https://www.cnbc.com/2023/01/09/the-earths-ozone-layer-is-slowly-recovering-un-report-finds-.html
https://ozone.unep.org/system/files/documents/Scientific-Assessment-of-Ozone-Depletion-2022-Executive-Summary.pdf
This does NOT solve the climate crisis! (Score:3)
There are some other posts here assuming that this correction will entirely solve the climate crisis.
The NYT article does not say that.
The ozone layer is a small protection against greenhouse gases. Without it, global warming speeds up. With it restored, global warming slows down a tiny bit.
Greenhouse gases in our atmosphere trap heat in, so the planet warms up.
That's still happening. We're still screwed.
Repairing the ozone layer makes us slightly less screwed.
Re: (Score:3)
The ozone layer is a small protection against greenhouse gases.
Not exactly; the primary benefit for life on Earth is that ozone absorbs ultraviolet radiation, notably UVC which is the most harmful and ionizing of the wavelengths of UV.
Re: (Score:2)
Not exactly; the primary benefit for life on Earth is that ozone absorbs ultraviolet radiation, notably UVC which is the most harmful and ionizing of the wavelengths of UV.
Agreed There are lots of UV-related issues that the ozone layer protects us from (especially regarding skin diseases). Greenhouse gases are rather separate. I'm not sure how much warming comes from increased ultraviolet light. I was referring to global warming when I said "climate crisis".
Re: (Score:2)
Repairing the ozone layer makes us slightly less screwed.
Yes. "Slightly" is the keyword here. And it was a pretty long-term effort for that slight effect.
Re: (Score:2)
we're not screwed, our childrens children will be screwed
If your "we" refers to folks close to retirement, you might be right, but your children are screwed. I'm expecting the methane vents exposed by ice sheets [slashdot.org] that sink into the ocean [slashdot.org] (which is unsurprisingly speeding up [slashdot.org]) to make things considerably worse in a decade or so. The wildfires from droughts and the floods from higher sea levels plus increasingly severe storms are already affecting us and they're going to get exponentially more hostile.
Tell me that again in 2040.
Moving the problem? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I guess it would depend on which of the hundreds of refrigerants you are talking about. But I mean who could expect you to be able to find that information, it's not like there is a global network of information at your fingertips.
Re: (Score:2)