NASA Says Ozone Hole is Smallest Since 1988

Space, the environment, new discoveries and new uses for old ones
User avatar
Professor Fate
Posts: 4077
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2016 5:11 pm

NASA Says Ozone Hole is Smallest Since 1988

Postby Professor Fate » Fri Nov 03, 2017 12:08 pm

"It's really small this year. That's a good thing," Newman said.

Newman, chief Earth scientist at NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center, said this year's drop is mostly natural but is on top of a trend of smaller steady improvements likely from the banning of ozone-eating chemicals in a 1987 international treaty. The ozone hole hit its highest in 2000 at 11.5 million square miles.

Ozone is a colorless combination of three oxygen atoms. High in the atmosphere, about 7 to 25 miles above the Earth, ozone shields Earth from ultraviolet rays that cause skin cancer, crop damage and other problems.

Scientists at the United Nation a few years ago determined that without the 1987 treaty there would have been an extra 2 million skin cancer cases by 2030. They said overall the ozone layer is beginning to recover because of the phase-out of chemicals used in refrigerants and aerosol cans.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/ozone-hole ... lest-peak/


Well, obviously we have giant butterflies in CA. They's climbin' in your windows, They's snatchin' your people up, tryin' to steal 'em. So y'all need to hide your kids, hide your stars, and hide your coaches cause they're grabin' everybody out here.

User avatar
Fordama
Posts: 17782
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 3:12 pm

Re: NASA Says Ozone Hole is Smallest Since 1988

Postby Fordama » Sat Nov 04, 2017 6:33 am

Form and old NASA publication:

"There is little disagreement among atmospheric researchers on major causes of Ozone depletion, particularly the role of man-made chlorofluorocarbons in the depletion. For more information on this click on major and minor sources of stratopheric chlorine. Atmospheric researchers also agree there are a great many unanswered questions concerning ozone depletion. The big question which generates disagreement is: is there sufficient data and sufficient consequences to justify banning highly valuable CFC's? This question can be separated into two unresolved issues:"

The counter to banning CFC's: Too expensive for our economy.

Now for several reasons the hole have been lessening (even though Kramer's favorite website states it hasn't been.)

And the banning of CFC's did not crash the economy.
This country of the United States was not built by those who waited and rested and wished to look behind them.---JFK

User avatar
Professor Fate
Posts: 4077
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2016 5:11 pm

Re: NASA Says Ozone Hole is Smallest Since 1988

Postby Professor Fate » Sat Nov 04, 2017 2:00 pm

So yeah, I guess it wasn't that big of a deal, if the hole is shrinking anyway, even with all the opposition from climate infidels.
Well, obviously we have giant butterflies in CA. They's climbin' in your windows, They's snatchin' your people up, tryin' to steal 'em. So y'all need to hide your kids, hide your stars, and hide your coaches cause they're grabin' everybody out here.

User avatar
kramer
Posts: 8852
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 8:38 pm

Re: NASA Says Ozone Hole is Smallest Since 1988

Postby kramer » Mon Nov 06, 2017 11:09 am

"I have seen this happen before, of course. We should have been warned by the CFC/ozone affair because the corruption of science in that was so bad that something like 80% of the measurements being made during that time were either faked, or incompetently done."

- James Lovelock

Science!
“We should have been warned by the CFC/ozone affair because the corruption of science in that was so bad that something like 80% of the measurements being made during that time were either faked, or incompetently done.”

- Scientist James Lovelock

Return to “Science and Technology”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest