Columbia engineering study links ozone hole to climate change all the way to the equator
First time that ozone depletion is shown to impact the entire circulation of the southern hemisphere
In a study to be published in the April 21st issue of Science magazine, researchers at Columbia University’s School of Engineering and Applied Science report their findings that the ozone hole, which is located over the South Pole, has affected the entire circulation of the Southern Hemisphere all the way to the equator. While previous work has shown that the ozone hole is changing the atmospheric flow in the high latitudes, the Columbia Engineering paper, “Impact of Polar Ozone Depletion on Subtropical Precipitation,” demonstrates that the ozone hole is able to influence the tropical circulation and increase rainfall at low latitudes in the Southern Hemisphere. This is the first time that ozone depletion, an upper atmospheric phenomenon confined to the polar regions, has been linked to climate change from the Pole to the equator.
“The ozone hole is not even mentioned in the summary for policymakers issued with the last IPCC report,” noted Lorenzo M. Polvani, Professor of Applied Mathematics and of Earth & Environmental Sciences, Senior Research Scientist at the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory, and co-author of the paper. “We show in this study that it has large and far-reaching impacts. The ozone hole is a big player in the climate system!”
“It’s really amazing that the ozone hole, located so high up in the atmosphere over Antarctica, can have an impact all the way to the tropics and affect rainfall there — it’s just like a domino effect,” said Sarah Kang, Postdoctoral Research Scientist in Columbia Engineering’s Department of Applied Physics and Applied Mathematics and lead author of the paper.
The ozone hole is now widely believed to have been the dominant agent of atmospheric circulation changes in the Southern Hemisphere in the last half century. This means, according to Polvani and Kang, that international agreements about mitigating climate change cannot be confined to dealing with carbon alone— ozone needs to be considered, too. “This could be a real game-changer,” Polvani added.
Located in the Earth’s stratosphere, just above the troposphere (which begins on Earth’s surface), the ozone layer absorbs most of the Sun’s harmful ultraviolet rays. Over the last half-century, widespread use of manmade compounds, especially household and commercial aerosols containing chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), has significantly and rapidly broken down the ozone layer, to a point where a hole in the Antarctic ozone layer was discovered in the mid 1980s. Thanks to the 1989 Montreal Protocol, now signed by 196 countries, global CFC production has been phased out. As a result, scientists have observed over the past decade that ozone depletion has largely halted and they now expect it to fully reverse, and the ozone hole to close by midcentury.
But, as Polvani has said, “While the ozone hole has been considered as a solved problem, we’re now finding it has caused a great deal of the climate change that’s been observed.” So, even though CFCs are no longer being added to the atmosphere, and the ozone layer will recover in the coming decades, the closing of the ozone hole will have a considerable impact on climate. This shows that through international treaties such as the Montreal Protocol, which has been called the single most successful international agreement to date, human beings are able to make changes to the climate system.
Together with colleagues at the Canadian Centre for Climate Modelling and Analysis in Victoria, BC, Kang and Polvani used two different state-of-the-art climate models to show the ozone hole effect. They first calculated the atmospheric changes in the models produced by creating an ozone hole. They then compared these changes with the ones that have been observed in the last few decades: the close agreement between the models and the observations shows that ozone has likely been responsible for the observed changes in Southern Hemisphere.
This important new finding was made possible by the international collaboration of the Columbia University scientists with Canadian colleagues. Model results pertaining to rainfall are notoriously difficult to calculate with climate models, and a single model is usually not sufficient to establish credible results. By joining hands and comparing results from two independent models, the scientists obtained solid results.
Kang and Polvani plan next to study extreme precipitation events, which are associated with major floods, mudslides, etc. “We really want to know,” said Kang, “if and how the closing of the ozone hole will affect these.”
This study was funded by a grant from the National Science Foundation to Columbia University.
Columbia Engineering
Columbia University’s Fu Foundation School of Engineering and Applied Science, founded in 1864, offers programs in nine departments to both undergraduate and graduate students. With facilities specifically designed and equipped to meet the laboratory and research needs of faculty and students, Columbia Engineering is home to NSF-NIH funded centers in genomic science, molecular nanostructures, materials science, and energy, as well as one of the world’s leading programs in financial engineering. These interdisciplinary centers are leading the way in their respective fields while individual groups of engineers and scientists collaborate to solve some of society’s more vexing challenges. http://www.engineering.columbia.edu/
===============================================================
Impact of Polar Ozone Depletion on Subtropical Precipitation
Kang et al 2011, Science Express
Abstract:
Over the past half-century, the ozone hole has caused a
poleward shift of the extratropical westerly jet in the
Southern Hemisphere. Here, we argue that these
extratropical circulation changes, resulting from ozone
depletion, have substantially contributed to subtropical
precipitation changes. Specifically, we show that
precipitation in the Southern subtropics in austral
summer increases significantly when climate models are
integrated with reduced polar ozone concentrations.
Furthermore, the observed patterns of subtropical
precipitation change, from 1979 to 2000, are very similar
to those in our model integrations, where ozone depletion
alone is prescribed. In both climate models and
observations, the subtropical moistening is linked to a
poleward shift of the extratropical westerly jet. Our
results highlight the importance of polar regions on the
subtropical hydrological cycle.
Fig. 4. Mechanism linking the ozone hole to subtropical
precipitation change. Shading is the zonal-mean response in
austral summer of (A and D), temperature (in K), (B and E),
zonal wind (in m s–1), and (C and F), mean meridional mass
streamfunction (in 109 kg s–1). Black solid contours in (A) and
(D) are the mean temperatures, and red dashed lines indicate
the tropopause height in the reference integrations; the arrows
illustrate the lifting of tropopause in response to ozone
depletion. Black solid (dashed) contours in (B) and (E) are
the mean westerlies (easterlies) in the reference integrations,
and the arrows illustrate the direction of extratropical
westerly jet shift. Black solid (dashed) contours in (C) and (F)
are the clockwise (counter-clockwise) mean meridional
circulation in the reference integrations, and the arrows
illustrate the direction of anomalous vertical motion induced
by ozone depletion. Top row: the coupled CMAM
integrations [experiment (i)]. Bottom row: the uncoupled
CAM3 integrations with ozone depletion confined to 40-90°S
[experiment (iv)].
Full paper here: Kang-04-22-11 (PDF)
Supplemental material: kangSOM110422 (PDF)
=========================================================
UPDATE: BTW, in case anybody cares, this post went up 30 minutes AFTER the media embargo was lifted at 14:00 EST April 21. Compare that to the big argument going on over the Nisbet report. I have to agree with Keith Kloor on this one. Breaking embargoes is not only unprofessional, it is a fast track to excluding oneself from receiving any further media pre-releases. – Anthony
Wow, it’s a wonder we’ve survived on this fragile planet this long.
[/sarc]
So it’s not CO2? Who knew.
Clearly what is needed now is a study showing that a higher atmospheric concentration of CO2 is essential to further repair of the ozone hole.
Gillett (Nathan) the best a Man can Get? hum hum…
Another sucked out of a finger stuff.
Lu 2009 in Physical Review Letters is much more convincing and not a hot bed of warmistas from BC…
That outta put a spanner in the works!
Is there another cause and effect problem? Could the observed circulation patterns lead to higher or lower ozone levels each spring rather than the other way around?
I was interested to see what data they had used to come to this conclusions, then I saw that it was based on tow new climate models and I am afraid I stopped reading…….
“to a point where a hole in the Antarctic ozone layer was discovered in the mid 1980s.” Horse hockey. Dobson found hole in 1956 I think.
“A dobson unit is the most basic measure used in ozone research. The unit is named after G.M.B. Dobson, one of the first scientists to investigate atmospheric ozone (~1920 – 1960). He designed the ‘Dobson Spectrometer’ – the standard instrument used to measure ozone from the ground. The Dobson spectrometer measures the intensity of solar UV radiation at four wavelengths, two of which are absorbed by ozone and two of which are not.”
http://toms.gsfc.nasa.gov/dobson.html
Over the past half-century, the ozone hole has caused a poleward shift of the extratropical westerly jet in the Southern Hemisphere.
I challenge this assumption.
According to this paper on the “Final Warming Date of the Antarctic Polar Vortex and Influences on its Interannual Variability”;
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_7598/is_20091115/ai_n42654411/
“several studies (including Waugh and Randel 1999; Waugh et al. 1999; Karpetchko et al. 2005; Black and McDaniel 2007) have indicated a trend over the 1980s and 1990s toward a later vortex breakdown.”
This is a good paper exploring the Polar Vortices;
http://www.columbia.edu/~lmp/paps/waugh+polvani-PlumbFestVolume-2010.pdf
and the chart on page 10 shows the vortex break-up dates for the Northern Hemisphere since 1960 and Southern Hemisphere since 1979.
I think it is more likely that the Antarctic Polar Vortex, particularly when it coalesces into a single funnel during the Polar Winter and when it breaks down in the Spring, is the cause, the ozone hole and jet shifts are probably just effects…
I have several comments:
1. The ozone hole was seen first when they developed instrumentation capable of seeing it. They have no idea if the ozone hole predates the instrumentality.
2. Chloride ions seem to be the biggest offenders. On a planet with seas full of chloride ions, I find it amazing that they are so sure that no mechanism exists to get a very tiny amount of ocean chlorides to the stratosphere.
3. Formic acid is also suppose to cause ozone depletion, but that would shift the blame from humans to insects.
4. Once the ozone hole supposedly fills in and subtropical precipitation decreases, can we blame them for the droughts it will cause?
Jim
Sorry, I cannot get excited about this. The results are based on the output of models. Even though they get “the right answer”, I dont believe the output of non-validated models. Then, from what I can gather, it is unlikely that the ozone hole was caused by pollution. When the hole was first discovered, no-one bothered to ask how long it had been there; it was simply assumed to be man made. Despite the cessation of the use of CFCs etc. the ozone hole has not changed much. It is more likely to be caused by the southern polar vortex.
Correlation isn’t good enough. What does “likely” mean?
Last I heard, there was a paper claiming that the original research blaming CFCs for the ‘Ozone hole’ had major errors in it, and it was unlikely that Man had anything to do with the hole at all……
Just curious here but hasn’t most of the CFCs been produced in the northern hemisphere and used there? If so wouldn’t the larger hole in the Ozone layer be in the Northern polar regions. I must be missing something due to not understanding how the currents are in the atmosphere. I truly wonder CFCs mostly produced and used in the northern hemisphere would produce the problems in the southern hemisphere.
Bill Derryberry
PS I am not being sark I just really don’t know or understand.
B
As a skeptic of AGW, THIS IS one thing that is plausible
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5irCU6puHjAtpqk0CNX9pKUxhc2kg?docId=958930e05e064d95a2625d41fd4e45f6
“It’s really amazing that the ozone hole, located so high up in the atmosphere over Antarctica, can have an impact all the way to the tropics and affect rainfall there…”
Unbelievable, in fact.
“Model results pertaining to rainfall are notoriously difficult to calculate with climate models, and a single model is usually not sufficient to establish credible results. By joining hands and comparing results from two independent models, the scientists obtained solid results….”
Model results are difficult to calculate with models. Who knew? But two models! Now you’re cookin’! Now we’ve got solid results! Not as good as robust, you understand, but still very, very good. And two independent models joining hands? Whoa-ho! They’re going to sing kumbaya, folks.
This is a total disaster – what about Al Gore’s green money he needs to keep his waterfront mansions fashionable? What about the poor third world dictators needing money for mansions in France? Money for their AK-47s? Money for their new limousines? Now how’s a poor third world dictator to make a living?
And what about all those poor AGW government funded “scientists” needing government funded programs to make ends meet in difficult financial times? All those government funded universities with their free government AGW handouts? Now what’s Obama supposed to do with all his green programs?
This is terrible news. Hey, we got windmills in construction all over North America. No, no, no – this report MUST be condemned as religious heresy at all cost. Too much money at stake to accept this – has the AGW community threatened beheading yet?
“This study was funded by a grant from blah blah blah”
Just so long as someone keeps on throwing money at ’em, they’ll ‘prove’ the ozone hole / CO2 / whatever-is-in-fashion was ‘likely’ the cause of whatever ‘might be’ worse than you thunk.
They have their computer models well trained.
Tap in “hemorrhoids” and “Dodo” and it automatically produces a paper showing that, contrary to what was previously thought, it was actually hemorrhoids that caused the tragic demise of the Dodo.
For an extra bag of money, they’ll do more ‘research’ to prove that hemorrhoids also caused the heatwave in Russia in 2010.
It’s tough being a “Scientist”. But someone has to do it!
\sarc.
Dodgy Geezer says:
April 21, 2011 at 12:17 pm
“Last I heard, there was a paper claiming that the original research blaming CFCs for the ‘Ozone hole’ had major errors in it, and it was unlikely that Man had anything to do with the hole at all……”
I’m old enough to recall back in the 70’s all the hoo-ha about my Right Guard deoderant causing the hole in the ozone and freon being deadly for the ozone layer, yata, yata, yata. So, now that we don’t use that stuff, how come we still have a hole in the ozone? I suspect all of this CO2 clap-trap will go in the same direction in a few years. Science is absolutely dead as far as I am concerned. Where are all those idiots now that were pissin and moanin about the ozone back then? I suppose that any of them still around are on this new Climate Disruption band-wagon.
This is what we let them get away with before…
• “…civilization will end within 15 or 30 years unless immediate action is taken against problems facing mankind,” biologist George Wald, Harvard University, April 19, 1970.
• By 1995, “…somewhere between 75 and 85 percent of all the species of living animals will be extinct.” Sen. Gaylord Nelson, quoting Dr. S. Dillon Ripley, Look magazine, April 1970.
• Because of increased dust, cloud cover and water vapor “…the planet will cool, the water vapor will fall and freeze, and a new Ice Age will be born,” Newsweek magazine, January 26, 1970.
• The world will be “…eleven degrees colder in the year 2000. This is about twice what it would take to put us into an ice age,” Kenneth Watt, speaking at Swarthmore University, April 19, 1970.
• “We are in an environmental crisis which threatens the survival of this nation, and of the world as a suitable place of human habitation,” biologist Barry Commoner, University of Washington, writing in the journal Environment, April 1970.
• “Man must stop pollution and conserve his resources, not merely to enhance existence but to save the race from the intolerable deteriorations and possible extinction,” The New York Times editorial, April 20, 1970.
• “By 1985, air pollution will have reduced the amount of sunlight reaching earth by one half…” Life magazine, January 1970.
• “Population will inevitably and completely outstrip whatever small increases in food supplies we make,” Paul Ehrlich, interview in Mademoiselle magazine, April 1970.
• “…air pollution…is certainly going to take hundreds of thousands of lives in the next few years alone,” Paul Ehrlich, interview in Mademoiselle magazine, April 1970.
• Ehrlich also predicted that in 1973, 200,000 Americans would die from air pollution, and that by 1980 the life expectancy of Americans would be 42 years.
• “It is already too late to avoid mass starvation,” Earth Day organizer Denis Hayes, The Living Wilderness, Spring 1970.
• “By the year 2000…the entire world, with the exception of Western Europe, North America and Australia, will be in famine,” Peter Gunter, North Texas State University, The Living Wilderness, Spring 1970.
Oh dear!
Does this mean the science isn’t settled after all?
That’s going to upset quite a few people, after what they have previously stated in public ad nauseum.
Another climate model which allegedly correctly fits with what has already happened to the climate. What we need is a climate model which correctly forecasts what happens next. That is the test. It is the failure of the gloom and doom forecasts over the past decade that has done most to discredit the whole AGW bandwagon. Reports like this, to have any scientific validity should include clear predictions which can be tested over the next few years and decades.
What strikes me as off already is the mismatch between Ozone Hole not now getting any bigger (or so far any smaller?) but the alleged reversal of the effects of the Ozone hole over the past decade. How does that work?
demonstrates that the ozone hole is able to influence the tropical circulation and increase rainfall at low latitudes in the Southern Hemisphere
====================================================
First they need to rectify the contradictions from this past year:
A lot of studies said the Amazon is in drought….
….actual measurements say it’s flooding
They always seem to pick places where they can’t be checked out.
• “…civilization will end within 15 or 30 years unless immediate action is taken against problems facing mankind,” biologist George Wald, Harvard University, April 19, 1970.
• By 1995, “…somewhere between 75 and 85 percent of all the species of living animals will be extinct.” Sen. Gaylord Nelson, quoting Dr. S. Dillon Ripley, Look magazine, April 1970.
• Because of increased dust, cloud cover and water vapor “…the planet will cool, the water vapor will fall and freeze, and a new Ice Age will be born,” Newsweek magazine, January 26, 1970.
• The world will be “…eleven degrees colder in the year 2000. This is about twice what it would take to put us into an ice age,” Kenneth Watt, speaking at Swarthmore University, April 19, 1970.
• “We are in an environmental crisis which threatens the survival of this nation, and of the world as a suitable place of human habitation,” biologist Barry Commoner, University of Washington, writing in the journal Environment, April 1970.
• “Man must stop pollution and conserve his resources, not merely to enhance existence but to save the race from the intolerable deteriorations and possible extinction,” The New York Times editorial, April 20, 1970.
• “By 1985, air pollution will have reduced the amount of sunlight reaching earth by one half…” Life magazine, January 1970.
• “Population will inevitably and completely outstrip whatever small increases in food supplies we make,” Paul Ehrlich, interview in Mademoiselle magazine, April 1970.
• “…air pollution…is certainly going to take hundreds of thousands of lives in the next few years alone,” Paul Ehrlich, interview in Mademoiselle magazine, April 1970.
• Ehrlich also predicted that in 1973, 200,000 Americans would die from air pollution, and that by 1980 the life expectancy of Americans would be 42 years.
• “It is already too late to avoid mass starvation,” Earth Day organizer Denis Hayes, The Living Wilderness, Spring 1970.
• “By the year 2000…the entire world, with the exception of Western Europe, North America and Australia, will be in famine,” Peter Gunter, North Texas State University, The Living Wilderness, Spring 1970.
My computer model says bad computer models generate CO2 and destroy the ozone.