PDA

View Full Version : Discussion: Arriving This Week: The Ozone Hole



Fraser
2004-Sep-01, 04:42 PM
SUMMARY: The European Space Agency's Envisat earth observation satellite is getting ready for the arrival of an annual event - the opening of the hole in the Earth's ozone layer. Since a hole first opened up in the mid-1980s, satellites have been tracking its arrival and shape for years, and scientists have gotten quite good at predicting the conditions that will create the gap. The ozone hole should open up in about a week's time, and then close up again in November or December when higher temperatures around the South Pole will mix ozone-rich air into the region.

What do you think about this story? Post your comments below.

Tiny
2004-Sep-01, 06:34 PM
Another Heat Wave create by the broken Ozone layer... wonder how many will die this time... by the way, does this kinda phenomena has anything to do with the EL Nino that scientist mention on July?

kdhrocks
2004-Sep-01, 08:27 PM
As I understand this topic, the arrival of the subArtic Spring breaks down Chlorine into O2 and that is bad, in what way? I understand the blanketing effect of the Ozone on UV, but is the creation of O2 all bad? I read that we are now trying out Solor sails for propulsion, how about an umbrella for UV? I realize that man has distroyed and fouled his nest over the past thousand years or so, but does that mean we can't learn from our past? This problem is reversible, perhaps not in our lifetimes, however we can fix it if we want to.
KDHROCKS

antoniseb
2004-Sep-01, 08:52 PM
Originally posted by kdhrocks@Sep 1 2004, 08:27 PM
the arrival of the subArtic Spring breaks down Chlorine into O2 and that is bad, in what way?
Your post misrepresented the chemistry involved. The important thing is that the ozone [O3] is destroyed by converting it into O2. Normally ozone is something you don't want to breath, and so we regard it as nasty air polution in the troposphere, but in the thin Ozone layer, it blocks out a lot of the UV rays.

In the time since the Ozone hole started getting serious I've read reports that the sheep in Southern Chile and Argentina are going blind from the harsh sunlight, and that skin cancer is rapidly on the rise down there. These could be exagerated media-hype, or they could be real. I really don't know, but that is the reason it is bad.

Were you thinking of building one giant umbrella for the whole South Polar region, or were you suggesting that every man women child and sheep carry one while they're down there?

John L
2004-Sep-01, 09:48 PM
When did the ozone hole first open, and how thick was the ozone layer above the Antarctic before the hole appeared? How many years were measurements of the ozone layer made before the hole opened?

I ask these because I don't believe in the science behind the ozone hole, and I've never read anywhere that the hole appeared after years of measuring and not finding a hole. If that's the case, and the hole suddenly appeared out of nowhere (caused by us, of course) then ok, but if they found the hole when they first measured the layer above the Antarctic, then how do we know that the hole has not always been there?

Algenon the mouse
2004-Sep-02, 02:51 AM
I think the term "hole" is misleading. The ozone layer is actually thinning everywhere with the most dramatic thinning happening around the south pole. It has been measured for sometime and most countries have agreed through international agreements to limit CFCs. Something I am sure that they would not agree to if there wasn't some kind of proof because of the money that is being lost. There is a debate currently going on to ban CFCs altogether internationally. (industries such as Dupont arguing about the cost, EPA arguing about the rise in skin cancer and cataracts)

Cancer has been on the rise as a result. (anyone old enough to remember how you could go outside without sunscreen and only worry about getting a slight burn?)

StarLab
2004-Sep-02, 09:08 PM
But why the south pole first? Why not a huge hole somewhere over the tropics, or San Francisco? What is so unique about Antarctica that the ozone ripped apart over there instead? I mean, it's so unpopulated and everything.

ASEI
2004-Sep-03, 01:03 AM
Something I am sure that they would not agree to if there wasn't some kind of proof because of the money that is being lost. There is a debate currently going on to ban CFCs altogether internationally. Countries agree to all sorts of dumb things without any basis in proof. The whole R-12 elimination program was probably due more to the fact that it hurt the dominant refrigerant manufacturers and helped the one which had a patent on the far less efficient R-134a. Since we all use the "clean" R-134a refrigerant now, there shouldn't be a problem, but with environmentalists, the problem must never be allowed to die.

The fact that it has historically happened over the north and south poles should suggest something other than industrialized human involvement (last time I checked, Antarctica wasn't very populous, and winds tend towards the equator), but no one wants to look for alternatives.

Algenon the mouse
2004-Sep-03, 01:43 AM
There is atmospheric eddys and currents. The currents push the polutants into one of the eddys (pools) which builds up the hydrocarbons and increases the thinning of the ozone layer. That is why the ice caps are at the north and south pole. It doesn't snow there very often, but the ice has accumulated because of weather patterns which are affected by the earth's rotation, the sun and the tilt of the earth. That is why the so called "hole" appeared there first. If the ice poles were located in other locations like San Fransico, then that is where the ozone would be at its thinnest.

Countries might agree to all sorts of dumb things, but they tend to be reluctant to agree to things that will cost money. I know that the EPA has done extensive research on the ozone.

I feel that it is basically cause and effect. We have been polluting the earth for years waiting for the next generation to solve the problem. Something was bound to happen.

The Head Ed.
2004-Oct-01, 05:53 PM
Your "belief" that the "cause and effect" is our pollution causing the ozone hole is illogical. Just believing that something was "bound to happen" does not prove that mans release of CFC's has "caused" the ozone hole.
We still don't know when the ozone hole actually appeared. All that we know is when we first discovered it. What if it was around 2000 years ago? Would it then be "our" fault?
Do C.F.C.'s destroy ozone? Certainly they do. But through her volcanoes, nature belches out much more C.F.C.'s than mankind ever does. Which C.F.C.'s are responsible for the "hole" in the ozone layer?
Finally, untill scientists can actually "prove" that the C.F.C.'s in the stratosphere are those released by mankind, any "cause and effect" argument is just speculation!

jack o all trades
2004-Nov-18, 09:32 AM
I believe the whole has a lot to do with the fact that in the summer or winter, im not sure, there is less sun light shinning on it. Hence its dark that time of year. This means that there is less UV hitting the atmosphere, and there isnt as much UV to create Ozone. CFC's are a catalyst with a half life generally of about 60-70 years. Catalyst's just speed reactions they dont participate. Considering that the ozone hole has become smaller last year there is little to worry about. It means we have rounded the hump and only have to wait for the whole to fill up.

jack o all trades.
2004-Nov-18, 09:35 AM
So it really doesnt matter if the cfc's are there because we put them there or not. The whole is starting to close up.

spacepunk
2004-Nov-19, 04:18 AM
The fact that it has historically happened over the north and south poles should suggest something other than industrialized human involvement (last time I checked, Antarctica wasn't very populous, and winds tend towards the equator), but no one wants to look for alternatives.


There is at least one possible alternate theory, which perhaps belongs in another forum! Mount Erubus is a sulphurous volcano whose gaseous effluent is forced to stay at the south pole's vicinity due to coriolis action (from the revolving Earth). Along with its other volcanically produced greenhouse gases the creation of the ozone hole is a natural development.

Would there be at least some substance to this suggestion?

spacepunk
2004-Nov-19, 04:19 AM
The fact that it has historically happened over the north and south poles should suggest something other than industrialized human involvement (last time I checked, Antarctica wasn't very populous, and winds tend towards the equator), but no one wants to look for alternatives.


There is at least one possible alternate theory, which perhaps belongs in another forum! Mount Erubus is a sulphurous volcano whose gaseous effluent is forced to stay at the south pole's vicinity due to coriolis action (from the revolving Earth). Along with its other volcanically produced greenhouse gases the creation of the ozone hole is a natural development.

Would there be at least some substance to this suggestion?

spacepunk
2004-Dec-02, 02:43 AM
Here's a website that was passed on which deals with "alternate theories" concerning the topic of climate

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/climatesceptics/