From a University of Waterloo press release (h/t to commenter Rob)
WATERLOO, Ont. (Tuesday, Sept. 16, 2008) — A University of Waterloo scientist says that cosmic rays are a key cause for expanding the hole in the ozone layer over the South Pole — and predicts the largest ozone hole will occur in one or two weeks.
Qing-Bin Lu, a professor of physics and astronomy who studies ozone depletion, said that it was generally accepted for more than two decades that the Earth’s ozone layer is depleted by chlorine atoms produced by sunlight-induced destruction of chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) in the atmosphere. But more and more evidence now points to a new theory that the cosmic rays (energy particles that originate in space) play a major role.
The ozone layer is a layer in Earth’s atmosphere that contains high concentrations of ozone. It absorbs almost all of the sun’s high-frequency ultraviolet light, which is potentially damaging to life on Earth and causes diseases such as skin cancer and cataracts. The Antarctic ozone hole can be larger than the size of North America.
Lu said that data from several sources, including NASA satellites, show a strong correlation between cosmic ray intensity and ozone depletion. Lab measurements demonstrate a mechanism by which cosmic rays cause drastic reactions of ozone-depleting chlorine inside polar clouds.
Satellite data in the period of 1980-2007, covering two full 11-year solar cycles, demonstrate the significant correlation between cosmic rays and ozone depletion.
“This finding, combined with laboratory measurements, provides strong evidence of the role of cosmic-ray driven reactions in causing the ozone hole and resolves the mystery why a large discrepancy between the sunlight-related photochemical model and the observed ozone depletion exists,” Lu said.
For example, the most recent scientific assessments of ozone depletion by the World Meteorological Organization and the United Nations Environment Programme, which use photochemical models, predict ozone will increase by one to 2.5 per cent between 2000 and 2020 and Antarctic springtime ozone is projected to increase by five to 10 per cent between 2000 and 2020.
In sharp contrast, Lu said his study predicts the severest ozone loss — resulting in the largest ozone hole — will occur over the South Pole this month. The study also predicts another large hole will probably occur around 2019.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Thank you for the Uni-Bremen link Dr. Svalgaard. Upon visiting, this first sentence jumped right out at me; “Wir freuen uns über Ihren Besuch. Mehr als 200 Seiten mit laufend aktualisierten Informationen erwarten Sie.”
I am floored! Though the meaning escapes me as I do not sprachen ze german, I can only imagine what such ominous sounding words portend! (All science should be related in German. Way cool)
BTW. Two esteemed and respected scientists in one family; impressive!
🙂
DaveM: Achtung! Alles touristen und non-technishen looken peepers! Das machine is nicht fur der fingerpoken und mittengrabben. Is easy schnappen der springenwerk, blowenfusen und popencorken mit spitzen sparken. Das machine is diggen by experten only. Is nicht fur gerwerken by das dummkopfen. Das rubbernecken sightseeren keepen das cottenpiken hands in das pockets. Relaxen und watchen das blinkenlights.
[…] Watts Up With That? […]
Two outcomes of the Montreal Protocol ban on CFC’s were an increase in cost and a reduction in effectiveness of asthma inhalers, especially rescue inhalers. Millions of asthma suffers have been directly harmed. The number of deaths from acute asthma attacks due to less effective inhalers is unknown, but I do know that the price of hydrofluoroalkane (HFA) inhalers is 5 times that of the more effective CFC inhalers.
For more information on this issue see The National Campaign to Save CFC Asthma Inhalers here:
http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/saveCFCinhalers/
James Lovelock’s book, Homage to Gaia, Chap 8 – The Ozone War, is interesting. He discusses his analysis of atmospheric CFC’s and CCl4 from samples he took in a jet plane which flew to 45,000 ft (1974). From this he showed that CFC concentrations remained constant in the atmosphere but declined in the stratosphere. This accorded with M-R’s theory. However, he also demonstrated a large flux of natural chlorine and other halogens. When he presented his findings about the natural flux at CFC meetings. “…Many seemed to have accepted uncritically the “Green” notion that organisms rejected chlorine from their metabolism, and they saw chlorine compounds as the toxic products of industry. To me this was fanaticism, not science….”. I understand that James Lovelock is an advocate for the “Green” AGW catastrophe. Plus ca change…
Off topic: http://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/mailings/20081023_Obstruction.pdf
Thought you might want to know what our good friend James is up to.
This may be interesting regarding ozone breakdown
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/06/080625140656.htm
excerpt,
” detected the presence of the chemicals bromine and iodine oxide over the ocean for this region. These chemicals, produced by sea spray and emissions from phytoplankton (microscopic plants in the ocean), attack the ozone, breaking it down. As the ozone is destroyed, a chemical is produced that attacks and destroys the greenhouse gas methane. Up until now it has been impossible to monitor the atmosphere of this remote region over time because of its physical inaccessibility. Including this new chemistry in climate models will provide far more accurate estimates of ozone and methane in the atmosphere and improve future climate predictions. ”
end of excerpt.
Hmm, ozone and methane with one “stone”…
that won’t be modelled then…
I have found this NASA publication that relates OZON to the Maunder Minimum: http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Newsroom/NewImages/images.php3?img_id=17460
In regard to the CFC discussion, you can find some nice articles about the subject on: http://www.sepp.org/key%20issues/ozone/ozone.html
When CFC’s (especially FREON GAS) was banned, a US multinational, holding the patent for a FREON alternative made a bundle at the expense of the consumer (a multi-billion dollar business) and the Russian refrigerator manufacturers.
Now it’s CO2, already listed as a dangerous gas by US law with no proof whatsoever that it is causing GW.
Since CO2 can not be banned the caps and trade is created.
No matter what the trend in lower global temperatures state, no matter what scientist say, it is all about power and money.
“… combined with laboratory measurements …”
Obviously Qing-Bin Lu isn’t a proper scientist. Doesn’t he know that you don’t do proper science in the laboratory? For proper science you write a computer model with plenty of tunable inputs so you can generate the correct results.
Question, & I apologise if I have missed something. Has any one heard the answer to the question posed a while ago of,”how do we know it hasn’t always been there?”
I have never seen any response to it only that according to lab experiments CFCs destroy ozone.
All I know is that as a practicing engineer, I am frequently called in to look at cracking in old building/houses, etc. Minor cracks the owner had suddenly “discovered”. It equally frequently turns out that the cracking has been there for yonks, but only just observed, & are merely an old building relaxing a little over a long timescale!
Any opinions as to whether it has always been there?
Still something missing tho, Like maybe solar wind beaming us like a lighthouse for quite a while now. Increases in atmospheric disturbances like aurora and gee a larger southern pole hole. Take that in account with decreased magnetism, and then maybe add increased cosmic rays. You cant explain it with just one thing.. Its that blinders method that gets ya in trouble.
PS Sun has a pumpkin face:)
AnyMouse (23:14:10) : Sweet, pal!
Takes me back to The Saturday Evening Post c.1950s.
The possible role of cosmic rays is interesting because being a retired radiation chemist I have often suspected that fast ion molecule reactions might play an important role in ozone destruction. Could the effect of the earths magnetic fiels on electrons and positive ions explain why the ozone hole only appears ar the south pole?
OT: The Blog Stats hits counter passed another megahit. 5,011,568 hits and counting.
Lief,
Thanks for the reply, you might be the perfect person to answer my questions about this.
When you say the signal is an artifact of incomplete compensation I wonder how do they make compensation for the seasons. And if the seasonal compensations were done perfectly, wouldn’t that still leave the effects of solar forcing.
I found the same phase angle for all three temp metrics?? GISS, UAH and RSS within a few weeks. Are they all using the same correction techniques?
I see both 1 year and half year variations in the signal. I’m working on half year today.
I am going to copy your comments over to my blog for my visitors to read. If you don’t mind, could you answer the questions there, Anthony has a very interesting post here on a different topic.
It is very interesting to see that there already was a link between low solar activity resulting in OZON depletion (confirming the link between solar activity and cosmic radiation)
This is another article from NASA 2001:
http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Newsroom/NasaNews/2001/200112065794.html
“During those periods of low solar activity, levels of the Sun’s ultraviolet radiation decrease, and can significantly impact ozone formation in the stratosphere. “The changes in ozone that we modeled were key in producing the enhanced response,” Shindell said. “The changes in the upper atmosphere then feed down to the surface climate.”
“European winter temperatures over that time period were reduced by 1.8 to 2.7 degrees Fahrenheit (1-1.5 Celsius). This cool down is evident through derived temperature readings from tree rings and ice cores, and in historical temperature records, as gathered by the University of Massachusetts-Amherst and the University of Virginia”.
It looks if we are now in a position to observe first hand what is happening with our climate: low sunspot activity, low magnetic field, higher levels of cosmic radiation and now the OZON link! I think it is a very interesting time for scientists.
Are we really heading for a new Maunder Minimum?
Ozone depletion was never as big of a problem as was advertised by proponents of the Montreal Protocol. As I recall, the reduction of ozone, whether natural, man-made or some combination of both, had a health impact similar to moving about 60 miles closer to the equator. In other words, it was not a threat worth worrying about. Even in Antarctica, the amount of ultraviolet radiation reaching the surface at the height of the ozone hole is still a tiny fraction of the amount that falls per acre in the tropics every day.
Considering that the environmental movement views the Montreal Protocol as a blueprint for successful global action, and the harm of ozone depletion was knowingly blown out of proportion, is it not likely that the same modus-operandi is being used today on global warming?
As Sarah Palin would say…”You betcha!”
Caleb (17:49:01)
This brief summary from NASA addresses your question about volcanoes and stratospheric ozone.
As I recall, there was a lot of hype about a sudden ozone drop over mid-northern latitudes in the early-mid 90s. Quite similar in fact to the convulsions over arctic ice recently. It turned out that Mt. Pinatubo had greatly exagerated a smaller downward trend, leading to a lot of “if current trends continue” speculation.
Having said that, just a general note of caution regarding the tone of this thread. Steve McIntyre used to frequently remind his commenters that critics will use your weakest argument against you and ignore your strongest arguments. I would caution against arguing there is no evidence for CFC-driven ozone depletion or that there are no measurements showing increased levels of CFCs in the stratosphere in the 20th century.
paminator: I try to forget about Columbia. Damn fool decision.
I suspect the ozone hole has been there for a very long time. Mount Erebus spews kilotons of SO2 into the atmosphere every year. Perhaps not as potent as CFC’s in damaging ozone, but much closer to the action and in greater volume.
Of course, that’s a bit like the MWP and LIA. If they existed, many of today’s sky-is-falling theories come unglued. As do their proponents.
There was no ozone hole before CFC’s.
There was no warming before human produced CO2.
The Emperor’s new clothes look just splendid.
(the check is in the mail)
Ron de Haan (06:37:30) :
It looks if we are now in a position to observe first hand what is happening with our climate: low sunspot activity, low magnetic field, higher levels of cosmic radiation and now the OZON link! I think it is a very interesting time for scientists.
Are we really heading for a new Maunder Minimum?
The sunspot number, magnetic field, and cosmic ray level all revert to closely the same values at EVERY sunspot minimum [even the Maunder minimum] so today’s values are not unusual in themselves. What is interesting for scientists is that we now are getting so much more and better data that we better can assess the situation at all those previous minima [even at the Maunder Minimum itself].
I do not think that a Maunder Minimum is imminent [but would not be surprised if I’m wrong – THAT would be really exiting].
Rick Werne:
That sounds like 5MWatts. Congratulations to Anthony.
Jeff Id (06:36:02) :
When you say the signal is an artifact of incomplete compensation I wonder how do they make compensation for the seasons. And if the seasonal compensations were done perfectly, wouldn’t that still leave the effects of solar forcing.
I don’t KNOW how they compensate, but as far as I can tell the compensation is empirical: you just calculate the average temperature for each day of the year [or month?] over a baseline period and subtract the resulting curve from subsequent measurements. This takes care [it is thought] of the seasonal variation of solar forcing [incl. varying distance]. Apparently, there are some problems with that assumption [as per Tamino and you].
Alan the Brit
I have read something elsewhere (sorry where I can not remember where at present) that a seasonal ozone “hole” was first measured in the Antarctic in the late 1940s or early 1950s.
The “consensus” later dismissed this because the “instruments” used were not accurate enough to be reliable.
Using the very same type of “instruments” however the “hole” was discovered in the 1980s……………
Mark (08:40:18) :Regarding CFC’s, does anybody know if NASA or any other organization has ever measured the amount of CFC’s in the atmosphere by altitude? I’ve searched and searched for this information and have never found anything. Try Peter Taylor who as a scientist and Greenpeace supporter worked to ban CFC’s. He’s one of us, in fact his climate work was what prompted me to abandon AGW.
John C. Roberts, B.S Atmospheric Science Says:
October 7th, 2008 at 7:28 pm
The idea that the hole in the ozone layer is man-made is a myth. One must ask themselves this question: Why is the hole in the southern hemisphere when most of the poluting countries of the world (US/Europe/Russia/China) are in the Northern hemisphere? A very important question to ask. As a meteorologist, I can tell you that because of the way air flows on our planet that air in the northern hemisphere generally stays there and the same for the south.
To understand why the hole is there you need to understand how ozone is created. Ozone is formed naturally in the upper stratosphere by short wavelength ultraviolet radiation. Wavelengths less than ~240 nanometers are absorbed by oxygen molecules (O2), which dissociate to give O atoms. The O atoms combine with other oxygen molecules to make ozone. The bottom line is that you need sunlight to create ozone. Mild levels of ozone are found at the earths surface in city streets all across the world especially toward the end of the day. About an hour after the sun sets the ozone at the surface is gone.
Alright, now that you got that you need to ask yourself what the two poles don’t have 6 months out of the year since the earth is tilted 23 1/2 degrees. Answer: Sunlight.
The reason why a hole develops over the south pole is because there is no sunlight there during its winter. During the summer time the hole gets much smaller.
So why isn’t there a hole in the northern hemisphere if it gets dark there too? Good question. The main reason is because of the northern jet stream. The northern jet stream moves in a more North to South flow which is caused by all of the land masses the northern hemisphere has. Our jet stream dips deep down toward the equator at some points where there is a lot of ozone (because there is a lot of sunlight). It then transports that ozone into the north preventing it from developing a hole.
The southern jet stream moves in a basic East to West direction since there is little land masses in the south to affect it. Because of this, the southern pole does not get the boost of ozone from the equator like the north does.
I hope that this explanation helps some of you out there. We did not see a hole in the ozone develop. We “discovered” that a hole was there. I can assure you that man did not create it. Saying man is responsible for this hole would be like the first explorers to discover the Grand Canyon coming to the conclusion that it must have been something man did. The only other reason I can think of for this myth being perpetuated is that politicians like to use it to incite the public. Please feel free to look up these scientific claims for yourself.