NASA Sees First Direct Proof of Ozone Hole Recovery

[Trish]

Using measurements from NASA's Aura satellite, scientists studied chlorine within the Antarctic ozone hole over the last several years, watching as the amount slowly decreased. Credit: NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center/Katy Mersmann

For the first time, scientists have shown through direct observations of the ozone hole by a satellite instrument, built by NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, California, that levels of ozone-destroying chlorine are declining, resulting in less ozone depletion.

Measurements show that the decline in chlorine, resulting from an international ban on chlorine-containing human-produce chemicals called chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), has resulted in about 20 percent less ozone depletion during the Antarctic winter than there was in 2005 -- the first year that measurements of chlorine and ozone during the Antarctic winter were made by NASA's Aura satellite.

[Crepitus]

Score 1 for the environmentalists.

[Ethereal]

I doubt you will hear much objections to this. Unlike another theory I could mention, this one was fairly conclusive and the solution to the problem wasn't to tax the entire world.

[Peter1469]

The ozone hole grows in the summer and shrinks in the winter.

[Chris]

Score 1 for the environmentalists.

How's that? CO2 is rising at alarming rates. The environmentalists claim that will cause global warming and ozone depletion. But warming has been in hiatus for close to 20 years and the ozone is recoverying.

[Crepitus]

How's that? CO2 is rising at alarming rates. The environmentalists claim that will cause global warming and ozone depletion. But warming has been in hiatus for close to 20 years and the ozone is recoverying.

Ozone depletion is not an effect of co2 emission or global warming, nor does it cause global warming which is not in "hiatus" BTW.

https://insideclimatenews.org/news/0...limate-science

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart...ata-180961697/

[Crepitus]

The ozone hole grows in the summer and shrinks in the winter.

Gotta read that there link Peter, it explains alla that stuff.

[Chris]

Ozone depletion is not an effect of co2 emission or global warming, nor does it cause global warming which is not in "hiatus" BTW.

https://insideclimatenews.org/news/0...limate-science

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart...ata-180961697/

Ozone depletion is not an effect of co2 emission or global warming

It's more compicated than you think.

Is There a Connection Between the Ozone Hole and Global Warming?

...Since the 1960s, there has been a trend of increasing warming of the lower atmosphere and a cooling of the upper atmosphere. This warming-cooling dynamic creates conditions that lead to ozone loss.

Observations show that as greenhouse gases increase and result in heating in the lower atmosphere (troposphere), a cooling is occurring in the upper atmosphere (stratosphere). Largely because heat from Earth's surface that normally would convey through the troposphere and stratosphere, and eventually escape to space, is now being trapped (or confined to the troposphere).

The increasing temperatures at the Earth's surface and decreasing temperatures in higher parts of the atmosphere can be partly explained using the blanket analogy.

Carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gases rise into the atmosphere and spread around the globe, like a blanket wrapping Earth. This blanket warms the surface of the Earth and protects it from the cold air above it.

The increased concentrations of heat-trapping gases make the blanket uncomfortably thicker. Wrapped now in a thicker blanket, Earth’s surface warms up, heats the blanket itself, and traps more heat in the lower atmosphere.

The blanket also prevents heat from moving from the lower atmosphere to the stratosphere, cooling down the stratosphere as a result.

In other words, heat-trapping gases contribute to creating the cooling conditions in the atmosphere that lead to ozone depletion. Greenhouse gases absorb heat at relatively low altitudes and warm the surface--but they have the opposite effect in higher altitudes because they prevent heat from rising.

In a cooler stratosphere, ozone loss creates a cooling effect that results in further ozone depletion. UV radiation releases heat into the stratosphere when it reacts with ozone. With less ozone there is less heat released, amplifying the cooling in the lower stratosphere, and enhancing the formation of ozone-depleting polar stratospheric clouds, especially near the South Pole.

https://insideclimatenews.org/news/0...limate-science

When the warmining hiatus was first discovered by Curry, it was acknowledged but it was argued 12 years was not enough, a 15 year window was required for it to be significant. Been 20 years now.

Your link points to an article that says temps in one signle year, 2016, were higher. Wait 14 more years.

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart...ata-180961697/

That is a single study that suggested, with much controversy, that all the global temperature measurements were wrong. But then they were also wrong when hockey stick warming was proclaimed. And a single study is not determinative in science.

[Chris]

Gotta read that there link Peter, it explains alla that stuff.

IOW, you can't explain it but think a link does.

[Crepitus]

It's more compicated than you think.

Is There a Connection Between the Ozone Hole and Global Warming?







When the warmining hiatus was first discovered by Curry, it was acknowledged but it was argued 12 years was not enough, a 15 year window was required for it to be significant. Been 20 years now.

Your link points to an article that says temps in one signle year, 2016, were higher. Wait 14 more years.




That is a single study that suggested, with much controversy, that all the global temperature measurements were wrong. But then they were also wrong when hockey stick warming was proclaimed. And a single study is not determinative in science.

Gee Chris, to believe your own post you would have to be live in AGW wouldn't you?

And it's a link to one study of many with controversy generated only by conservative climate deniers.