Follow this blog:
RSS

Remember ozone holes? NASA just found a big one

By | October 24, 2011, 12:20 PM PDT

But an international protocol is improving the situation, it says. Is that a model for CO2 emissions?

Above, the Antarctic ozone hole in 2006, believed to be the largest on record. Last month NASA spotted the 9th largest.

Spot the difference: Above, the largest ever recorded ozone hole, Sept. 2006, 10.6 million square miles. Below, the 9th largest, last month, 10.05 million square miles. Still huge.

While CO2 emissions grab the energy and environmental headlines, NASA last month spotted the ninth largest ozone hole on record.

You remember ozone holes: Chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) from aerosol cans and refrigerators deplete the earth’s protective ozone layer and thus allow more ultraviolet radiation through, elevating the risk of skin cancer, cataracts, and other maladies. It’s especially bad over Antarctica.

Back in 1987 almost 200 nations signed up to the Montreal Protocol, which phases out the use of ozone-damaging chemicals. It’s working. Atmospheric CFCs peaked in 2000, according to NASA.

And yet NASA spotted one of the most gaping holes on record last month when the Antarctic ozone hole reached its annual southern hemisphere spring peak on Sept. 12.

“It stretched to 10.05 million square miles, the ninth largest ozone hole on record,” NASA reported in a press release. It has been measuring ozone holes for over 30 years.

The space agency wasn’t surprised, because CFCs have a long lifetime.

“Even though it was relatively large, the area of this year’s ozone hole was within the range we’d expect given the levels of manmade ozone-depleting chemicals that continue to persist in the atmosphere,” said Paul Newman, chief scientist for atmospheres at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Md. “In 2100, CFCs will still be 20 percent more abundant in the atmosphere than they were in 1950. So while it’s not getting any worse, it won’t get better fast.”

As James Butler, director of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s Global Monitoring Division in Boulder, Colo., noted, “The manmade chemicals known to destroy ozone are slowly declining because of international action, but there are still large amounts of these chemicals doing damage.”

Ozone’s story seems to offer a couple of lessons to the troubled international efforts to cohesively reduce emissions of greenhouse gases like CO2 – an area where the U.N.’s Copenhagen Climate Change Conference infamously fell short nearly two years ago.

One is that a couple hundred countries can agree to measures with teeth.

But another is that such measures take time to yield real results.

For CO2 optimists, the Montreal Protocol on ozone improvement provides hope. For doom-and-gloomers, the Sept. 12 ozone hole might reaffirm that it’s too late to take any effective measures. For those who think global warming is a bunch of malarkey, nothing changes.

Your thoughts?

Images: NASA

Start your week smarter with our weekly e-mail newsletter. It's your cheat sheet for good ideas. Get it.

Mark Halper

About Mark Halper

Mark Halper is a contributing editor for SmartPlanet.

Mark Halper

Mark Halper

Contributing Editor

Mark Halper has written for TIME, Fortune, Financial Times, the UK's Independent on Sunday, Forbes, New York Times, Wired, Variety and The Guardian. He is based in Bristol, U.K.

Follow him on Twitter.

Mark Halper

Mark Halper

Mark has no financial holdings in the companies he writes about. He occasionally travels at the expense of companies or their press relations agencies in order to report on a company or industry event related to it; Mark will prominently disclose this information when appropriate. This relationship will have no influence on his coverage. Companies he covers do not get to review columns in advance, or select or reject topics.

He writes for SmartPlanet and is not an employee of CBS.

If you liked this, don't miss...
9
Comments

Join the conversation!

Follow via:
RSS
+1 Vote
+ -
It appears that CO2 is a minor problem
Compared to tne methane emmited into the atmosphere. Methane is 21 x more of a greenhouse gas than CO2 and is released from all rotting organic matter.
Dams constructed for hydropower are not going away any time soon are produce enormouse amounts of Metane.
Together with the destruction of very important forests like the Amazon. That absorb the carbon as part of their life cycle.
The oceans have Methane ice that releases very large quantities of methane continuosly.
The volcanic activity above and below sea level add to the global warming together with the Ozone holes letting in more damaging ultraviolet.
I don't see how we can possibly influence the warming trend as so much is beyond our capability.
Politicians are useles at doing anything accept securing their own backsides.
So it is just a matter of time before we kiss our own backsides goodby.
Posted by TonyTrenton
25th Oct 2011
+1 Vote
+ -
CO2 is still a major problem
There is over 200 times as much CO2 in the atmosphere as there is methane. Also, methane doesn't last all that long. Most of it is gone within 20 years whereas CO2 lasts for 1000's of years. Volcanic activity is a very minor contributor to global warming. They release only about 1% as much CO2 per year as human activities.
Posted by riverat1
Updated - 25th Oct 2011
+1 Vote
+ -
Ozone layer
I never cease to be surprised that the hole(s) in the Ozone layer are substantially in the Southern hemisphere and are blamed on CCF's which are 90% made and used in the Northern hemisphere.
Posted by harrisgx
25th Oct 2011
+2 Votes
+ -
Ozone CFCs and logic
DuPont's Freon12 (dichlorodifluoromethane) was blamed for the ozone hole over the antarctic in the 70's, even though the "hole" opens and closes depending on temperatures above the earth's surface. Most of the year it is closed, but colder temp's. result in its opening. Freon was discovered in 1928 and became the best refrigerant ever created. Freon12 is heavier than air, so it could help to reduce bad ground-level ozone and smog. How could it be carried to the stratosphere if it is heavier than air? The non-science of removing Freon12 from the market is a travesty. In the US it cost $1 per pound in 1970, and over $40 per pound today because of taxes. Freon12 is permitted to be produced and sold in China, but its "cousin" Freon22 (chlorodifluoromethane, which is 10% Freon12) widely used in air conditioners and milk cooling equipment, is now taxed at over $15 per pound and rising. When was the last time you saw a news article on how this ripoff is damaging the world's economies and how the "tax" money is spent?
Posted by Dr Don R
Updated - 25th Oct 2011
+1 Vote
+ -
CFC's Still Being Released
Until every last piece of old refrigeration equipment is found in the world and the refrigerant sequestered properly, there will continue to be a new supply of CFC's adding to the problem for many years to come. Our legacy to the world! Thanks DuPont. Better living through chemistry, RIGHT.
Posted by dcr100@...
26th Oct 2011
+4 Votes
+ -
Skeptical
Do they really know if CFC's do it? Do they really know what does it? Is it a natural phenomenon? Do they really know? I doubt it.
Posted by klappjack
26th Oct 2011
+3 Votes
+ -
Re Large Ozone hole
It shows that eliminating CFCs was more about the R12 patent expiring than the ozone layer. The holes are natural, will always be there and explains why penguins are not harmed by the lack of an ozone layer. 10,000 years ago the northern hemisphere was covered in ice. The Earth has warmed! No human intervention was needed! NOTE: There is a lot of unused land in Canada and Siberia that could become productive, as it was at one time when tropical plants grew there, so warming would be a good thing. Claiming humans are causing it, or that we can change the climate is a political way to control how we live our lives. I don't buy it, you shouldn't either!
Posted by erik_moseid@...
26th Oct 2011
0 Votes
+ -
Skeptic is now convinced ...
Climate skeptic, Prof. Muller is now convinced that Climate Change is due to human activity, based on his own analysis of better data:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/30/opinion/the-conversion-of-a-climate-change-skeptic.html?_r=1&source=science20.com
Posted by johnkes
31st Jul
0 Votes
+ -
NASA SPACE SHUTTLES DESTROYS THE OZONE SHIELD
And solid rocket fuel technology CONTINUES to do so.

It is so funny that the finger is being pointed at CFC's when they are HEAVIER than air.

So, how is this chemical finding its way all the way out to the ozone layer to do its damage?

Here is what scientist Helen Caldicott wrote about what is causing the ozone layer depletion. And this was back in 1990:

http://www.ringnebula.com/project-censored/1976-1992/1990/1990-story4.htm
Posted by darinselby
29th Aug
Join the conversation
Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]

Join the SmartPlanet community and join the conversation! Signing up is fast and free. Don't wait -- we want to hear your opinion!