Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Keep out of the sun!

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Keep out of the sun!

    COLOGNE - Arctic winds have caused a hole in the atmosphere's ozone layer to form over central Europe, experts in Germany warned on Wednesday.
    The Arctic winds, also linked to record-setting low temperatures across Europe in recent weeks, exacerbated the ozone depletions process, it was said.
    According to findings obtained by high-altitude Russian research aircraft, nitrogen oxide and nitrogen dioxide gases in the upper stratosphere have climbed to the highest levels in at least two decades.
    The increases have led to ozone reductions of up to 60 percent roughly 20 kilometres in altitude above the heart of Europe, said Marc von Hobe, a scientist with Germany's Juelich Research Centre.
    "This decline was completely unexpected," he said. "The findings point out a critical need to better understand the processes occurring in the ozone layer."
    Winds in the upper part of a massive winter low-pressure system that confines air over the Arctic region, known as the polar stratospheric vortex, sped up in February to become the strongest on record, he said.

    The spinning vortex allowed the nitrogen gases, believed by the team to have formed at least 20 kilometres above the stratosphere as a result of chemical reactions triggered by energetic particles from the sun, to descend more easily into the stratosphere.
    The increases in the two nitrogen gases - collectively known as NOx - are important because they are major players in the stratospheric ozone destruction process. A form of oxygen, ozone protects life on Earth from the harmful effects of ultraviolet radiation. The ozone layer has thinned markedly in high latitudes of the Northern and Southern Hemispheres in recent decades, primarily due to reactions involving chlorofluorocarbons and other industrial gases.

    Scientists believe the 1987 Montreal Protocol, an international agreement that has phased out the production and use of such ozone- destroying compounds, may allow the protective ozone layer to be restored by the middle of this century.

    Source : Expatica , 9 March 2005
    Brian (the devil incarnate)

  • #2

    Comment


    • #3
      you tell me after ive spent 4 hours at the beach.
      www.lizziemorrison.com

      Comment


      • #4
        About time the northern hemisphere had a taste of what they have be sowing... anyone still in denial?

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Marshmallowman
          About time the northern hemisphere had a taste of what they have be sowing... anyone still in denial?
          We're Australian, we already know to keep out of the sun
          but yes, welcome to the ozone hole
          Juu nin to iro


          English doesn't borrow from other languages. It follows them down dark alleys, knocks them over, and goes through their pockets for loose grammar.

          Comment


          • #6
            Again, blame governments who lick corporate ass. Democracy? Don't make me laugh.

            Comment


            • #7
              slip slop slap people! Yah don't want to get skin cancer, that's for sure. Neither sunburns, cuse they increase the risk of skin cancer!


              well just why is there such a huge ozone hole over Australia?
              I don't really get it...such a spread country, low population density not THAT many cars and still getting fried the moment the sun hits your skin...

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by KvHagedorn
                Again, blame governments who lick corporate ass. Democracy? Don't make me laugh.
                I think that's rather unfair.

                It happened because of ignorance. A guy called Thomas Midgely (yeah! the same guy as put tetraethyl lead in motor fuel!) synthesised CFC-12 in the late 1920s and realised that it would be the ideal refrigerant to replace the toxic sulfur dioxide and ammonia used in fridges. From the 1930s on, industry used the stuff wholesale for this, and later other jobs, such as foam blowing and aerosol cans. There was no inkling that it could be a risk to the environment, because the product was non-toxic.

                In 1974, two scientists at ICLA, Molina and Sherwood, doing atmospheric chemistry, brought out the theory that CFCs could hypothetically destroy the ozone layer, but without any proof. For once, the USA and a few other countries adopted the precautionary principle without waiting for science to catch up or any observation of ozone depletion; they banned CFCs for use in the most emissive application, most aerosol cans, as early as 1978. Other governments followed suit.

                It was not until September 1980 that a UK scientist, Joe Farman, observed the "ozone hole" but he did not believe his instruments. He obtained some new instruments and observed a small thinning in 1981 and 1982, but nothing spectacular, at the edge of Antarctica. However, it was worse in 1983 and he published his landmark paper in 1984, announcing that ozone depletion was for real. This caused consternation among various governments and the Vienna Convention was signed the following year, mandating the UN to set up a mechanism to study and control the situation. This resulted in the Montreal Protocol to be signed on 16 September 1987, with the signatories agreeing to phase down the emissions of some ozone-depleting substances (ODS). At this time, there was still no scientific proof that linked CFCs with ozone depletion. In fact, DuPont (your "big business") issued a categorical statement that there was no link and was strongly opposed to the US government's stand in signing the Protocol. They were, of course, backed by the other major CFC manufacturers, ICI, Hoechst, Allied Signal, Asahi Glass, Atochem etc., all of them in countries which were signatories to the Protocol. So there was a head-to-head clash between "big industry" and government.

                In September 1988, the scientific link between CFCs and ozone depletion was proven, by a U2 aircraft flying at max altitude through the ozone "hole" and obtaining air samples from various places. These contained CFCs at exactly the right quantities to fit in with what Molina and Sherwood predicted could happen, 14 years earlier. Within one week, DuPont turned their coat around and made a landmark announcement that they would co-operate to their utmost with measures to avoid ozone depletion.

                As our knowledge became more complete, the Protocol had to be made more severe with many more ODSs added to the list of controlled substances. This process still continues, even though the major phase-out of ODSs in developed countries was completed by 1 January 1996.

                Where do I fit in with this? In 1975, I founded a company in Switzerland mainly devoted to the technology of cleaning printed circuits. One of the main substances used for this was a solvent, CFC-113. I promoted the use of water and was publishing papers showing that water could give better results than CFC-113. Following the death of two operators using CFC-113 from cardiac arrest, I started to give it more attention and, by 1979, realised that it, too, along with 1,1,1-trichloroethane, could be contributing to ozone depletion (I believe I was amongst the first to point out that these two substances, used massively in the electronics industry for various jobs, could be contributing). I first published my hypothesis in 1981 in my first book, the Handbook of Contamination and, a few years later, in another book that became the "bible" of electronics cleaning, sold worldwide. In early 1988, I received a letter from the Swiss Minister of the Interior, Flavio Cotti, inviting me to join the Swiss National Commission as their solvents expert, this commission having been set up as a response to the Protocol. Later the same year, a meeting of the Parties to the Protocol started to realise that the situation was becoming much more serious and they set up various supportive panels, under the UNEP Ozone Secretariat. The Swiss Government mandated me to serve on the Solvents Technical Options Committee of the Technical and Economics Assessment Panel. From there, I chaired and co-chaired various other bodies and was also commissioned to act for two other UN agencies, in Paris and Montreal. So, yes, I was deeply immersed into most aspects of the ozone depletion saga and have even attebded some of the political decision-making plenary UN meetings on the subject.

                I can therefore state categorically that no governments licked corporate ass in this affair and, in fact, they opposed corporate ass, in many ways. OK, there is one on-going controversy where the US EPA may be appearing to do some licking of some very small corporate ass, but that is a very long story, without clear scientific issues and involves a substance with a low ozone-depletion potential. Europe is taking an opposite stand. I can also state that the traditional CFC manufacturers have all lost business (at least two of them have even stopped making all refrigerants and allied substances, even non-ODSs).
                Brian (the devil incarnate)

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by GuchiGuh
                  slip slop slap people! Yah don't want to get skin cancer, that's for sure. Neither sunburns, cuse they increase the risk of skin cancer!


                  well just why is there such a huge ozone hole over Australia?
                  I don't really get it...such a spread country, low population density not THAT many cars and still getting fried the moment the sun hits your skin...
                  The answer to that question is easy.

                  1. the typical residence time of CFCs is ~100 years. That means that ¾ of all the CFCs produced from 1930 to 1996 is still floating around in the air.

                  2. It takes ~14 days for a gas emitted to circumnavigate the globe in its own latitude and ~ 1 year for it to homogenise in its own hemispherical troposphere, 5 years to homogenise throughout the troposphere and 7 years to homogenise in the stratosphere. Therefore, if I had emitted 1 tonne of CFC-12 in 1932, the year I was born, most of it would still exist, evenly distributed in the troposphere and the stratosphere of both the N and S hemispheres.

                  3. In the S. Hemisphere, a peculiar weather phenomenon, called the polar vortex, occurs in the spring over the S. Pole and, to a lesser extent, over the N. Pole. This causes a complex series of things to happen, including some extremely high stratospheric clouds that form, to which CFC molecules become "fixed", exaggerating for about one month, the degree of ozone depletion, forming the so-called hole. This spreads outwards as the vortex collapses, affecting Oz, S. Africa and, worst, Patagonia.

                  Therefore, it has nothing to do with the sparse population density of Oz: you are benefitting from all the CFCs that have been released over the last seven decades in N. America, Europe and Japan!

                  I imagine that the present depletion over Europe is because of a displacement of the usual spring thinning over the N. Pole because of unusual weather conditions this year.
                  Brian (the devil incarnate)

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Yes, apparently the weather in Germany is influenced by winds coming from the nordic countries.

                    Good years ahead for the sun lotion makers...

                    Do you think there's an active way that can be used to reduce the amounts of CFC in the atmosphere?

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X