Ozone layer recovers, limiting global warming by 0.5 Celsius

The ozone layer is on track to recover within decades due to the global phaseout of ozone-depleting chemicals. The climate is also benefiting, says a new UN report.

When the Montreal Protocol on Ozone Depleting Substances was internationally ratified in 1989, the world came together to repair the damaged ozone layer that protects planet Earth from harmful ultraviolet (UV) radiation.

...

Dramatic thinning of the ozone, also known as an ozone hole, above Antarctica will be completely reversed in around four decades, the panel of experts confirmed. The smaller ozone hole above the Arctic is expected to repair much sooner.

Ozone layer recovers, limiting global warming by 0.5 Celsius

I recall, long ago, when I was much younger, as long hard push to 'alert' the world about the excessive use of commercially convenient chemicals in industrial and manufacturing processes. Environmentalists sounded the alarm on biphenyls, pesticides (DDTs,) chlorofluorocarbons, plastics, and so many more. Many in the public sphere raised an eyebrow, despite the popular presses suddenly started sending mixed messages about how "the science isn't settled" and recalling the "alarms" being sounded in the 70's regarding an "inevitable" impending mini-ice-age (sound familiar at all?)

The Earth's polar ozone layers were found to be thinning rapidly and it became clear that the overall effects were not going to be anything remotely good.

When the Montreal Protocol on Ozone Depleting Substances was internationally ratified in 1989, the world came together to repair the damaged ozone layer that protects planet Earth from harmful ultraviolet (UV) radiation.

Under the agreement, reversing ozone depletion has been as simple as identifying and then banning nearly 99% of ozone-killing chemicals — including the chlorofluorocarbons that once kept fridges cool.

A UN-backed scientific panel overseeing the Montreal Protocol presented its latest four-yearly assessment on Monday, confirming the continued strengthening of the ozone layer in the upper stratosphere.

So while the globalists will tout this as proof we can 'fix' the environment, they will ignore that it was the for-profit activity which they were repeatedly warned would damage the environment that actually began this episode in the first place. They will not explore the pressures and circumstances that made the continued dangerous practices not be addressed before the damage was done.

Instead, they will recharacterize this as a triumph of their committee gatherings ostensibly focused on 'saving' the planet. Note the particular focus on the "carbon doctrine" embedded throughout the article. As if it were "settled science."

"Ozone action sets a precedent for climate action," said Petteri Taalas, the head of the World Meteorological Organization. "Our success in phasing out ozone-eating chemicals shows us what can and must be done — as a matter of urgency — to transition away from fossil fuels, reduce greenhouse gases and so limit temperature increase."

The panel affirmed the treaty's positive impact on the climate, in part through the 2016 Kigali Amendment to the protocol that requires the phasedown of production and consumption of some hydrofluorocarbons that are also powerful greenhouse gases.

The assessment stated that this amendment alone is estimated to avoid 0.3–0.5 degrees Celsius (up to 0.9 Fahrenheit) of warming by 2100.

"By protecting plants from ultraviolet radiation, allowing them to live and store carbon, it has avoided up to an extra 1 degree C of global warming," noted UN head Guterres.

This is a great example of 'opinion engineering." Accept that it is their wisdom that 'fixed' everything... but was it? Or was it that they allowed industries to enjoy continued exploitation of the environment until it could be ignored no longer? I don't have special answers, or even expertise that would make anything I ask more relevant... so ignore away... that's what 'they' do - you're just "following the science."

The article is a 'good news' story... one that the mainstream media isn't really focusing on right now... what could be more important? Everything else, I guess.

a reply to: Maxmars

An aunt of mine had a very serious heart issue when this information first came out in the 70's; she couldn't even use whipped cream in a can.

'The science isn't settled' stalled progress in fixing the problem for decades, allowing the destruction to continue.

I've watched the same play out many time throughout my life. Glyphosates, GMO's, mRNA tech-until 'the science' finds something bigger, better-and possibly more destructive-nothing moves forward.

Do world leaders believe they will be immune to the destruction of our planet? Or is the destruction possibly not that bad, and by avoiding the chemically laced food supply and environment those of us being harmed are just 'collateral damage'?

a reply to: nugget1

I saw many people suffering anxiety over this. It manifested itself most on an intellectual level, which of course made it emotionally disturbing to many. At the time, being very young, I was mostly unconcerned.

Since then, it has become very clear that those who control the media can and have done everything in their power to recast the problem as caused by 'little' people, as opposed to industrial activities made immune from consideration by their economic significance.

The things you list, glyphosates, GMOs' etc. are part and parcel of the same thing. People whose profit-taking, and successful exploitation of ignorance are endemic also have control of all the means of discussion, media propagation, and by virtue of money, all the political prostitutes and elite wannabes extant.

When money is the only 'center' of things, all else is noise. Calling all those crushed by the outcomes of their agendas 'collateral damage' might be even less true if you consider that they don't think of them at all. Perhaps to them only revenue matters...

a reply to: Maxmars

Notice how they never mention all of the insane nuclear tests that they did?

Then they have the audacity to blame us...

Bastards.

originally posted by: Wide-Eyes
a reply to: Maxmars

Notice how they never mention all of the insane nuclear tests that they did?
Then they have the audacity to blame us...
Bastards.

Yes, that milk is spilled... but I suspect the overall effect to the environment was never remotely close to what a volcano like Tonga might do. At least we are passed that kind of wanton 'militaristic' showmanship (I hope.)

Governments and their NGO agencies will never admit 'culpability' of anything... they will - by necessity - tell us "It's all your fault," and then proceed to tell us how much money it's going to cost "us" to fix it. Go figure.

a reply to: Maxmars

I suspect the overall effect to the environment was never remotely close to what a volcano like Tonga might do. 

I get your point but they were literally shooting nukes at the atmosphere.

From 1945 to 1980, over 500 weapons tests were conducted in the atmosphere at a number of locations around the world. 

Atmospheric nuke tests.

a reply to: Wide-Eyes

I loved that episode...

originally posted by: Maxmars
a reply to: Wide-Eyes

I loved that episode...

Likewise mate!

😀

a reply to: Wide-Eyes
Bastards indeed, as all of those that have covered up the fact that it was nuclear testing that had the most effect in depleting Earth's Ozone layer.
We hear all this jazz about man made climate change and a carbon tax because WE are to blame, not the governments/militarys' of the World.

Fun fact:

When a nuclear weapon explodes in the air, the surrounding air is subjected to great heat, followed by relatively rapid cooling. These conditions are ideal for the production of tremendous amounts of nitric oxides. These oxides are carried into the upper atmosphere, where they reduce the concentration of protective ozone. Ozone is necessary to block harmful ultraviolet radiation from reaching the Earth's surface.

www.atomicarchive.com...

originally posted by: Quadrivium
a reply to: Wide-Eyes
Bastards indeed, as all of those that have covered up the fact that it was nuclear testing that had the most effect in depleting Earth's Ozone layer.
We hear all this jazz about man made climate change and a carbon tax because WE are to blame, not the governments/militarys' of the World.

Fun fact:

When a nuclear weapon explodes in the air, the surrounding air is subjected to great heat, followed by relatively rapid cooling. These conditions are ideal for the production of tremendous amounts of nitric oxides. These oxides are carried into the upper atmosphere, where they reduce the concentration of protective ozone. Ozone is necessary to block harmful ultraviolet radiation from reaching the Earth's surface.

www.atomicarchive.com...

Exactly that!

People evidently have short memories.

The info is out there but young minds aren't informed..

a reply to: Maxmars

I recall the warnings in the '70s and from my memory (hmmm) back then the main culprits were air conditioners, were they not?

I will ask the question again because no one has given me a satisfactory answer.

Virtually all the "ozone depleting substances" and now past nuclear tests were all happening in the Northern part of the Northern Hemisphere, ie the "developed world, so how come the biggest and most "frightening" hole is over the South Pole and not the North Pole?
Did these substances decide to travel South and only attack Antarctica?

originally posted by: quintessentone
a reply to: Maxmars

I recall the warnings in the '70s and from my memory (hmmm) back then the main culprits were air conditioners, were they not?

Yes. That was the mainline in the narrative offered up for public consumption. Freon was 'the big one' while aerosol cans were the next largest concern. My memory goes there too.

Of course, no one ever focused on the industrial standards of the time. And huge mega corporations were the recent 'owners' of the press... which led to a 'shift' in reporting which vilified the "you and I's" of the world into the culprits. Once again, go figure.

originally posted by: crayzeed
I will ask the question again because no one has given me a satisfactory answer.

Virtually all the "ozone depleting substances" and now past nuclear tests were all happening in the Northern part of the Northern Hemisphere, ie the "developed world, so how come the biggest and most "frightening" hole is over the South Pole and not the North Pole?
Did these substances decide to travel South and only attack Antarctica?

Excellent question. Sorry I cannot speak with any certainty of the "why" of it.

Perhaps planetary magnetics was a factor, as well as the general state of high altitude air movement of our world. I can't really say. But I know ATS... someone here can explain further, I just don't know who... or I would shoot out a u2u to ask them if they might add it here... any takers?

originally posted by: Maxmars

originally posted by: quintessentone
a reply to: Maxmars

I recall the warnings in the '70s and from my memory (hmmm) back then the main culprits were air conditioners, were they not?

Yes. That was the mainline in the narrative offered up for public consumption. Freon was 'the big one' while aerosol cans were the next largest concern. My memory goes there too.

Of course, no one ever focused on the industrial standards of the time. And huge mega corporations were the recent 'owners' of the press... which led to a 'shift' in reporting which vilified the "you and I's" of the world into the culprits. Once again, go figure.

Well I'm guessing many industries used air conditioning, like the trucking industry with their reefer vans, food stores, and of course office buildings etc.

Ozone hole is a naturally occuring phenonenom. Happens every year of various hole sizes.

The fallacy is that the size of the hole statted shrinking before the montreal accords took place....

I just thought I would add:

Record ozone hole over Arctic now closed
Sou-Jie van Brunnersum
05/01/2020
May 1, 2020

An "unprecedented" ozone depletion in the northern hemisphere has healed, but unlikely due to the impacts of worldwide coronavirus lockdowns, scientists say. The hole had been about three times the size of Greenland.

A "record-level" ozone hole over the Arctic – the biggest since 2011 – has now closed, the UN World Meteorological Organization (WMO) said on Friday.

The phenomenon was driven by ozone-depleting substances still in the atmosphere and a very cold winter in the stratosphere — the layer of the earth's atmosphere that lies between 10 and 50 kilometers (six to 31 miles) above the earth — Reuters cited WMO spokeswoman Clare Nullis saying at a UN briefing in Geneva.

www.dw.com...

originally posted by: Wide-Eyes

Quark and his kind could have made a monetary killing on Earth. lol

a reply to: Maxmars
To be truthful with you I fired off an email to a guy inn the Whitehouse about 10 or so years ago, a man called Ben DeAngelo and funny enough he replied, but for the life of me I cannot find his answer and I can't remember what he put. Sorry.