Nature 449, 382-383 (27 September 2007)
Chemists poke holes in ozone theory
Quirin Schiermeier
Reaction data of crucial chloride compounds called into question.
Extract:
As the world marks 20 years since the introduction of the Montreal Protocol to protect the ozone layer, Nature has learned of experimental data that threaten to shatter established theories of ozone chemistry. If the data are right, scientists will have to rethink their understanding of how ozone holes are formed and how that relates to climate change.
Long-lived chloride compounds from anthropogenic emissions of chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) are the main cause of worrying seasonal ozone losses in both hemispheres. In 1985, researchers discovered a hole in the ozone layer above the Antarctic, after atmospheric chloride levels built up. The Montreal Protocol, agreed in 1987 and ratified two years later, stopped the production and consumption of most ozone-destroying chemicals. But many will linger on in the atmosphere for decades to come. How and on what timescales they will break down depend on the molecules’ ultraviolet absorption spectrum (the wavelength of light a molecule can absorb), as the energy for the process comes from sunlight. Molecules break down and react at different speeds according to the wavelength available and the temperature, both of which are factored into the protocol.
So Markus Rex, an atmosphere scientist at the Alfred Wegener Institute of Polar and Marine Research in Potsdam, Germany, did a double-take when he saw new data for the break-down rate of a crucial molecule, dichlorine peroxide (Cl2O2). The rate of photolysis (light-activated splitting) of this molecule reported by chemists at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, California, was extremely low in the wavelengths available in the stratosphere — almost an order of magnitude lower than the currently accepted rate. “This must have far-reaching consequences,” Rex says. “If the measurements are correct we can basically no longer say we understand how ozone holes come into being.” What effect the results have on projections of the speed or extent of ozone depletion remains unclear.
The abstract of the original paper is here.
CCNet’s take:
CCNet 161/2007 – 27 September 2007 — Audiatur et altera pars
SCIENTIFIC CONSENSUS ON MAN-MADE OZONE HOLE MAY BE COMING APART
As the world marks 20 years since the introduction of the Montreal Protocol to protect the ozone layer, Nature has learned of experimental data that threaten to shatter established theories of ozone chemistry. If the data are right, scientists will have to rethink their understanding of how ozone holes are formed and how that relates to climate change.
–Quirin Schiermeier, News@Nature, 26 September 2007
If the measurements are correct we can basically no longer say we understand how ozone holes come into being.
–Markus Rex, News@Nature, 26 September 2007
Our understanding of chloride chemistry has really been blown apart.
–John Crowley, Max Planck Institute of Chemistry, 26 September 2007
Until recently everything looked like it fitted nicely. Now suddenly it’s like a plank has been pulled out of a bridge.
–Neil Harris, University of Cambridge, 26 September 2007
The new measurements raise “intriguing questions”, but don’t compromise the Montreal Protocol as such, says John Pyle, an atmosphere researcher at the University of Cambridge. “We’re starting to see the benefits of the protocol, but we need to keep the pressure on.” He says that he finds it “extremely hard to believe” that an unknown mechanism accounts for the bulk of observed ozone losses.
–Quirin Schiermeier, News@Nature, 26 September 2007
Jennifer Marohasy BSc PhD is a critical thinker with expertise in the scientific method.
And was this work “denied” and suppressed – was it allowed to be published in Nature. No and YES !
It took a while to surface:
‘Published’ here:
J. Phys. Chem. A, 111 (20), 4322 -4332, 2007. 10.1021/jp067660w S1089-5639(06)07660-2
Web Release Date: May 3, 2007
The consensus won’t like it.
The Ozone hole is something else we’re trying to fix, without fully understanding the mechanisms involved, or knowing how broken it really is.
Everyone who’s followed “ozone hole theory” knows it’s a theory, and most likely a scriptural artifact.
After all, the “ozone hole” would only affect people seeking suntans in polar wastelands, and only if they’re standing up.
If you want the back-story on this, check out corporations that want to sell HCFCs. A financial bonanza.
As an old hand in this game, I can assure you, nothing in the “environmental” arena gets big unless there’s some real profits to be made from a fake scare.
Hey Luke.
Told ya so dude.
By the way, an article in Nature isn’t the same as a news report. Nature, by virtue of it’s pay per view gate, is where inconvenient truths go to die.
Give a google on ozone hole discredited and you will come up with bubkis.
“This is available to institutional customers only.” is there for a reason.
That reason is pure evil.
I predict this story never sees the light of day.
UV or otherwise.
The report re the hole in the ozone layed states that researchers discovered the hole in 1985.
However a british scientist observed the thinning of the ozone layer in the antarctic in 1928. But I am sure that I would not be able to find the report now.
By the way, the location of the hole is right over the top of Mount Erebus, an active volcano in Antarctica. Mount Erebus emits 7 million tonnes of methane per year, fatal for ozone layers.
Let’s get the nature right first.
PP
James – no – don’t try to take the credit for some very tricky chemistry that you had nought to do with?
Anyway this is “A” paper – it’s all far from over yet.
PP – so why not ozone holes over all volcanoes, why is the effect seasonal and most volcanoes never reach the stratosphere. Doesn’t add up.
James – err the reason dude is that they’re not public funded. They’re a business. Get a grip.
Pure evil – ROTFL – pure evil removed by $30 – come on !
You ever pay $30 for a newspaper, Luke? How about one article? How about paying $30 for one article and then being asked for your credentials?
Nope, this has been buried. Six feet under.
NYT realised that pay as you view = no views. No views = no $ads
Get a grip?
Oh well Rog and James – the scientific community and Nature despite the pain and torment seem to have struggled through the years, holding back the tears and SURVIVED ! Some how despite the adversity and the hardship, scientists who care seem to have managed through. God it’s been tough. ROTFL.
You guys are both bunging it on anyway – with many of these (not saying all) Google scholar may find the paper available at the authors web site.
You could email the authors and ask for a reprint.
Local library?
But you’re not going to read have of this stuff anyway. Look at the reaction to links “ooooo oooooooo too much link link” — “I don’t want to know any details” — “ooo ooo just tell me in 2 lines”.
Convince me it isn’t mock outrage and crocodile tears. Hold on tighter Rog and try not to slip off.
And as I ssaid James – “Wait for it”
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php?p=475
Miles to go on this issue yet.
“ooooooo oooooooo too much link link” “oooo oooo just tell me in two lines”
So James try this
Luke,
The difference between Mt Erebus and most other volcanoes is that single eruptions can have a significant effect on the climate and earth atmosphere in the short term, whereas Mt Erebus is a continuous emitter of methane in large quantities.
Mt Pinatubo was such a singular event. The ash that it emitted caused global temperature to drop between 0.5 and 0.6 degrees. And the ozone hole increased substantially in size following the eruption. But once this happened, emissions stopped. I know, because I climbed the mountain and swam in the caldera a few years after the eruption.
Luke you have yet to see the day when you can buffalo me.
Guess what I found. Due to a global sand storm the tenuous Martian atmosphere was rendered visible in 2002. Behold the Martian “ozone hole”.
http://www.akasha.de/~aton/MARS-Npole-Hex-Ani.gif
“oooooo oooooo, but there aren’t any air conditioners on Mars,” “ooooooo ooooooo maybe those Martians are smelly buggers and haven’t invented roll on deoderant yet”
“ooooooo oooooooo too much link link” “oooo oooo just tell me in two lines”
“oooooo oooooo, but there aren’t any air conditioners on Mars,”
This is why I enjoy this blog
Looks like an ice cap – so ??
And can you explain yourself – what are you doing in a blog that looks like this???
http://phoenix.akasha.de/~aton/
Too much hooch again !
Anyway James – typical Australian weather forecaster
“And can you explain yourself – what are you doing in a blog that looks like this???”
Just a little followup. I googled “polar vortex” and came up with a whole list, including Venus, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Earth, and the latest example of a persistent low pressure zone over a planets polar region, Mars.
Recall I suspected an analog of the misnamed “ozone hole” on Titan. With the Martian atmosphere so thin, I never expected a polar vortex to become visible. Just serendipity and a little dust came together at the right time. Call it luck.
Evis Presley is talking a bunch of sense. Sort of reminds me of ME!
Luke should be binned for the Chopper weather report.
My keyboard arced when I spit my coffee.