Some Good News about Ozone!

[Sunstone]

As everyone should know, the earth is protected by a layer of ozone in the upper atmosphere that prevents most cosmic radiation from reaching the surface. Comic rays cause cancer, among other things, and most life forms on the planet are not evolved to survive too much cosmic radiation -- including humans.

In the 1980s, it was discovered that the ozone layer was being destroyed by chlorofluorocarbons, a chemical that was then widely used in aerosols and refrigerants.

Because the chlorofluorocarbon industry lacked the political power to stop it from happening, almost every nation on the planet was able to join together to ban their use in 1987.

So did the ban work?

Well, a newly released study says "yes"! In the absence of chlorofluorocarbons, the earth's ozone has been slowly healing itself. Today, the Northern Hemisphere’s upper ozone layer is on track to be repaired by the 2030s and the Antarctic hole will be fixed by the 2060s.

Now if the fossil fuel corporations and uber-rich Koch brothers would please just get out of the way and allow us to do something about global climate change before it's too late -- that would be nice.

Earth's ozone layer is healing from aerosol damage: UN

EDIT: As Exchemist points out, it's ultraviolet radiation, not cosmic rays, that the ozone layer guards against.

 

[Twilight Hue]

As everyone should know, the earth is protected by a layer of ozone in the upper atmosphere that prevents most cosmic radiation from reaching the surface. Comic rays cause cancer, among other things, and most life forms on the planet are not evolved to survive too much cosmic radiation -- including humans.

In the 1980s, it was discovered that the ozone layer was being destroyed by chlorofluorocarbons, a chemical that was then widely used in aerosols and refrigerants.

Because the chlorofluorocarbon industry lacked the political power to stop it from happening, almost every nation on the planet was able to join together to ban their use in 1987.

So did the ban work?

Well, a newly released study says "yes"! In the absence of chlorofluorocarbons, the earth's ozone has been slowly healing itself. Today, the Northern Hemisphere’s upper ozone layer is on track to be repaired by the 2030s and the Antarctic hole will be fixed by the 2060s.

Now if the fossil fuel corporations and uber-rich Koch brothers would please just get out of the way and allow us to do something about global climate change before it's too late -- that would be nice.

Earth's ozone layer is healing from aerosol damage: UN

That would depend upon if we can get a world consensus on the same level.

 

[Sunstone]

That would depend upon if we can get a world consensus on the same level.

True. And I think that would be a very difficult thing to do in the current political climate.

 

[crossfire]

I'm enthusiastic about cleaning up the pollution. However, I don't see carbon dioxide as a pollutant. If the politicians would untie carbon dioxide from all of the other pollutants, I would enthusiastically support it.
I'm also enthusiastic about developing clean energy sources and sustainable agriculture. Again, take carbon dioxide off the list of pollutants and I would enthusiastically support the measures. I see radiation and radioactive waste as a far greater threat than carbon dioxide.

 

[Twilight Hue]

True. And I think that would be a very difficult thing to do in the current political climate.

I think a lot of problems have to do with people feeling they were being pushed. It's natural to resist to that.

I might be wrong but I always thought the most effective way would be educating people as to the hows and why's, rather than vague theoretical/predictive models that are above the understanding of the average person.

But rather things like explaining how scientists are tracking a specific type of carbon in the air that only comes from human sources. Something solid like that.
Thanks to a fellow RF'er who took the time to explain it.

It's definitely drawn my attention closer to the human component when it comes to changes in the climate and the limits by which we shouldn't cross collectively to help avoid consequences of upsetting the balance of our environment.

 

[Sunstone]

I'm enthusiastic about cleaning up the pollution. However, I don't see carbon dioxide as a pollutant. If the politicians would untie carbon dioxide from all of the other pollutants, I would enthusiastically support it.
I'm also enthusiastic about developing clean energy sources and sustainable agriculture. Again, take carbon dioxide off the list of pollutants and I would enthusiastically support the measures. I see radiation and radioactive waste as a far greater threat than carbon dioxide.

Why don't you consider carbon dioxide a pollutant?

 

[crossfire]

Why don't you consider carbon dioxide a pollutant?

We exhale carbon dioxide. Plants need carbon dioxide to flourish. It is generally non-harmful. It's the methane, nitrous oxide, hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons, sulfur hexafluoride, pesticides, phosphates that cause algae overgrowth, and radiation & radioactive waste that causes harm.

 

[crossfire]

Most of the "climate change" legislation doesn't even address some of my concerns.

 

[Sunstone]

We exhale carbon dioxide. Plants need carbon dioxide to flourish.

I see. Interesting reasoning. We also drink water and need it to survive. However, astute observers have noted that too much water can drown you. So too, I think, too much carbon dioxide can heat up the earth's atmosphere beyond the point that many species are able to survive. In this opinion, I am supported by all but a tiny, tiny number of climate scientists.

 

[crossfire]

I see. Interesting reasoning. We also drink water and need it to survive. However, astute observers have noted that too much water can drown you. So too, I think, too much carbon dioxide can heat up the earth's atmosphere beyond the point that many species are able to survive. In this opinion, I am supported by all but a tiny, tiny number of climate scientists.

I dunno about that. The current carbon dioxide levels are extremely low as compared to the earth's history since life appeared. If we clean up the pollution, more plants and habitats will be able to recover and process the carbon dioxide. Concentrate on the real pollution.

 

[Sunstone]

I dunno about that. The current carbon dioxide levels are extremely low as compared to the earth's history since life appeared. If we clean up the pollution, more plants and habitats will be able to recover and process the carbon dioxide. Concentrate on the real pollution.

Your opinion does not jive with the majority of people who have spent years and decades actually studying this issue. But of course, everyone has an opinion -- some better informed than others.

 

[crossfire]

I mean really: do you cut the air supply to the plants we are trying to get to recover? Do you cut a trauma patient's oxygen, or do you give them extra oxygen while you are treating them? Cutting carbon dioxide makes zero sense to me in this respect.

 

[Sunstone]

Consensus Confirmed: Over 90% Of Climate Scientists Believe We’re Causing Global Warming

I'll believe the scientists.

 

[BSM1]

Ooops!

Unexpected ozone thinning could be more harmful than the famous hole

 

[crossfire]

Consensus Confirmed: Over 90% Of Climate Scientists Believe We’re Causing Global Warming

I'll believe the scientists.

I'm looking at it from a broader perspective. The plant life on earth right now is the hardiest of the hardiest in regards to low levels of carbon dioxide. If we want to push that further, you can expect to get more blooms (sexual reproduction) in an effort to adapt to lower levels of carbon dioxide and higher levels of chemical pollution and and radioactive pollution. The problem with this is that the pollenators are in trouble. Now, if the pollenators weren't in trouble, then maybe I'd be less concerned. However, with the pollenators also in trouble, I would also hedge my bets and go with cleaning up the environment and not smothering the plant life by limiting carbon dioxide in order to encourage asexual reproduction and propagation as well.

I'm just a small voice, though. I don't know if my message will register and be heeded without being dismissed outright as being uninformed and out of touch.

 

[exchemist]

As everyone should know, the earth is protected by a layer of ozone in the upper atmosphere that prevents most cosmic radiation from reaching the surface. Comic rays cause cancer, among other things, and most life forms on the planet are not evolved to survive too much cosmic radiation -- including humans.

In the 1980s, it was discovered that the ozone layer was being destroyed by chlorofluorocarbons, a chemical that was then widely used in aerosols and refrigerants.

Because the chlorofluorocarbon industry lacked the political power to stop it from happening, almost every nation on the planet was able to join together to ban their use in 1987.

So did the ban work?

Well, a newly released study says "yes"! In the absence of chlorofluorocarbons, the earth's ozone has been slowly healing itself. Today, the Northern Hemisphere’s upper ozone layer is on track to be repaired by the 2030s and the Antarctic hole will be fixed by the 2060s.

Now if the fossil fuel corporations and uber-rich Koch brothers would please just get out of the way and allow us to do something about global climate change before it's too late -- that would be nice.

Earth's ozone layer is healing from aerosol damage: UN

Actually it is not cosmic rays that the ozone layer protects us from, it is UV from the sun.

But indeed good news it is healing. In fact this is a great example of international cooperation. My suspicion is it was helped by the fact that the refrigerant industry has a number of global players who could see that offering alternatives could be a new stream of income. So they were quite happy to see laws passed banning the old generic and low-margin refrigerants and forcing makers of fridges to buy the new ones.

 

[Kapalika]

Comic rays cause cancer

I knew I shouldn't trust comedians! As someone pointed out, it's more so UV rays from the sun but I'd imagine it protects against some cosmic rays too.

Gama radiation is no laughing matter, however it's probably infrequent enough to not be a major concern (unless maybe there was a nearby cosmic event or something), at least in frequent enough that it's just a few cosmic rays for thousands or more of UV rays from the Sun which is so close to us in comparison. It probably also helps that the sun's radiation pressure diverts a lot of cosmic rays at the boundaries of the solar system (as well as the gas giants playing a role in this as well).

 

[Thief]

As everyone should know, the earth is protected by a layer of ozone in the upper atmosphere that prevents most cosmic radiation from reaching the surface. Comic rays cause cancer, among other things, and most life forms on the planet are not evolved to survive too much cosmic radiation -- including humans.

In the 1980s, it was discovered that the ozone layer was being destroyed by chlorofluorocarbons, a chemical that was then widely used in aerosols and refrigerants.

Because the chlorofluorocarbon industry lacked the political power to stop it from happening, almost every nation on the planet was able to join together to ban their use in 1987.

So did the ban work?

Well, a newly released study says "yes"! In the absence of chlorofluorocarbons, the earth's ozone has been slowly healing itself. Today, the Northern Hemisphere’s upper ozone layer is on track to be repaired by the 2030s and the Antarctic hole will be fixed by the 2060s.

Now if the fossil fuel corporations and uber-rich Koch brothers would please just get out of the way and allow us to do something about global climate change before it's too late -- that would be nice.

Earth's ozone layer is healing from aerosol damage: UN

I did not view the offering......oooops
but did it mention?

the ozone layer is very thin

about 12inches

 

[exchemist]

I did not view the offering......oooops
but did it mention?

the ozone layer is very thin

about 12inches

Er, about 10-50 km thick, actually: Ozone Layer Thickness | Dimensions Info

 

[Thief]

Er, about 10-50 km thick, actually: Ozone Layer Thickness | Dimensions Info

that's quite a difference...!!!!!!!

my report came from memory.....long ago
so I can't recall the source

the link shows a depth more than 100,000 ft (1100,000 to 32,000)

is that pure?

(there is an obvious typo in the stat)