Ooops – According to NASA, ozone destroying CCl4 remains in atmosphere, and continues to be emitted

Carbon-tetrachloride-3D-balls
Carbon-tetrachloride

NASA research shows Earth’s atmosphere contains an unexpectedly large amount of an ozone-depleting compound from an unknown source decades after the compound was banned worldwide.

Carbon tetrachloride (CCl4), which was once used in applications such as dry cleaning and as a fire-extinguishing agent, was regulated in 1987 under the Montreal Protocol along with other chlorofluorocarbons that destroy ozone and contribute to the ozone hole over Antarctica. Parties to the Montreal Protocol reported zero new CCl4 emissions between 2007-2012.

However, the new research shows worldwide emissions of CCl4 average 39 kilotons per year, approximately 30 percent of peak emissions prior to the international treaty going into effect.

“We are not supposed to be seeing this at all,” said Qing Liang, an atmospheric scientist at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland, and lead author of the study. “It is now apparent there are either unidentified industrial leakages, large emissions from contaminated sites, or unknown CCl4 sources.”

NASA video discusses new research that shows Earth’s atmosphere contains an unexpectedly large amount of an ozone-depleting compound from an unknown source decades after the compound was banned worldwide.

As of 2008, CCl4 accounted for about 11 percent of chlorine available for ozone depletion, which is not enough to alter the decreasing trend of ozone-depleting substances. Still, scientists and regulators want to know the source of the unexplained emissions.

For almost a decade, scientists have debated why the observed levels of CCl4 in the atmosphere have declined slower than expectations, which are based on what is known about how the compound is destroyed by solar radiation and other natural processes.

“Is there a physical CCl4 loss process we don’t understand, or are there emission sources that go unreported or are not identified?” Liang said.

With zero CCl4 emissions reported between 2007-2012, atmospheric concentrations of the compound should have declined at an expected rate of 4 percent per year. Observations from the ground showed atmospheric concentrations were only declining by 1 percent per year.

To investigate the discrepancy, Liang and colleagues used NASA’s 3-D GEOS Chemistry Climate Model and data from global networks of ground-based observations. The CCl4 measurements used in the study were made by scientists at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA’s) Earth System Research Laboratory and NOAA’s Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences at the University of Colorado, Boulder.

Model simulations of global atmospheric chemistry and the losses of CCl4 due to interactions with soil and the oceans pointed to an unidentified ongoing current source of CCl4. The results produced the first quantitative estimate of average global CCl4 emissions from 2000-2012.

In addition to unexplained sources of CCl4, the model results showed the chemical stays in the atmosphere 40 percent longer than previously thought. The research was published online in the Aug. 18 issue of Geophysical Research Letters.

“People believe the emissions of ozone-depleting substances have stopped because of the Montreal Protocol,” said Paul Newman, chief scientist for atmospheres at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center, and a co-author of the study. “Unfortunately, there is still a major source of CCl4 out in the world.”

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

74 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
August 20, 2014 3:31 pm

Chlorinated hydrocarbons are created in the ocean, by marine algae.

Reply to  Gerard Harbison
September 1, 2014 10:27 am

CCL4 is not a hydrocarbon -it contains no hydrogen in its molecule.

Gamecock
August 20, 2014 3:42 pm

“In addition to unexplained sources of CCl4, the model results showed the chemical stays in the atmosphere 40 percent longer than previously thought.”
I think it’s clear that between “unexplained sources” and “stays in the atmosphere 40 percent longer,” they have no clue what’s going on. Is the carbon tet in the atmosphere from new sources or longer retention? They don’t know. So claiming there are new sources is just speculation.

CodeTech
August 20, 2014 3:43 pm

Gee – not only are they confounded by “unintended consequences”, but now we see they’re confounded by unexpected everything.
Funny thing about assuming everything “harmful” being “human caused”… you’ll always be shocked when you find it’s not.

Paul Drahn
August 20, 2014 3:49 pm

They were banned from sale and production, not from possession. Thousands of fire extinguishers are still around full of carbon tet. Easiest way to dispose of is squirt on the ground or throw the glass container at a rock. Or put in the garbage so the chemical will be slow released from the land fill. Not much of a surprise.

Konrad
August 20, 2014 4:00 pm

Lots of that used in the production of polycrystalline silicon for cheap Chinese solar cells. But we can ignore that. Everyone knows solar is ever so clean and green….

cirby
August 20, 2014 4:00 pm

Here’s the funny thing: the ozone hole is closing way faster than predicted when they passed all of those “ozone depleting chemical” bans. There’s a lot more Freon and CCl4 in the atmosphere than there should be (some countries are still making Freon and similar products).
So why is the ozone hole not getting bigger? We were told – with little reservation – that even if we passed the Montreal Protocol, it would take until about 2050 for the ozone hole to stabilize and start to shrink, because it would take that long for those chemicals to break down.

August 20, 2014 4:00 pm

I’m going with the marine algae hypothesis.
So we need to look at ice core bubbles? Perhaps there has always been carbon tet being produced. Which of course means that humans were never the only significant source to begin with, which means that the atmosphere was stable with 40% prior production maximum ….
Somewhat like CO2? There is a non-human source, recent or not, which is not being considered in the balance, which means that we can’t stop the CO2 rise right now by killing the industrial economy …….?

adam
August 20, 2014 4:02 pm

No one would ever cheat.

John ;0)
August 20, 2014 4:04 pm

In just the last 5 years I have taken one 1950s chest freezer and two 1970s airconditioners to the scrap yard, after I took the copper out of them of course, also I know where 6 cars built in the 70s are stored with working air conditioning and slated for restoration, no reclamation was or will be done.
And I am just one person, probably a lot more of this going on than people realise

rogerknights
August 20, 2014 4:12 pm

adam says:
August 20, 2014 at 4:02 pm
No one would ever cheat.

I wonder if a satellite could trace the sources, the way the new satellite is going to trace sources of CO2.

Caz
August 20, 2014 4:20 pm

I thought the high altitude polar ozone holes were proven to be created by the solar wind.

August 20, 2014 4:28 pm

Carbon tetrachloride still has some industrial and research uses. You can buy it from Aldrich and Fisher. So, “banned” is a rather loose term. “Unexpectedly high” seems to imply a natural source.

Lil Fella from OZ
August 20, 2014 4:35 pm

Classic headline OOOPs! The trouble is these Ooopses cost us dearly. Ooops AGW!

Sam Hall
August 20, 2014 4:45 pm

The Montreal Protocol was passed because Dupont’s patent on freon was running out.

DaveK
August 20, 2014 4:50 pm

Let’s see… China still makes it, and has authorized it’s industries to use some 32,000 Tonnes of the stuff. Gee, I wonder if anybody is fudging the numbers there?

rogerknights
August 20, 2014 5:03 pm

DaveK says:
August 20, 2014 at 4:50 pm
Let’s see… China still makes it, and has authorized it’s industries to use some 32,000 Tonnes of the stuff. Gee, I wonder if anybody is fudging the numbers there?

Maybe NASA already knows that, and wants to send a message, but diplomatically didn’t point a finger.

August 20, 2014 5:40 pm

Haow many Gigatons of extra carbon were put in the atmosphere to comply with obviously not working Montreal protocol? Can I get energy efficient air conditioning back now or or do I still have to use the massive carbon footprint of replacement chemical compressors?
P.S. the Shuttle astronauts that died because the foam process had to change for CFC compliance want their lives back.

Dave
August 20, 2014 5:44 pm

Saw a report a coule of years back where the US (and probably others) military was using it as a degreaser for equipment wash down before maintenance work. Basically pressure washing with the stuff outdoors.

August 20, 2014 5:48 pm

NASA admits they do not know. That should be the headlines. It makes one wonder how much else they do not know..

DD More
August 20, 2014 5:56 pm

108 Countries Support HFC Curbs under Montreal Protocol – Posted November 24, 2011
The good news: Support continued to grow in Bali for taking steps to avoid disastrous increases in production of HFCs. 108 countries – more than half the world’s nations – have now backed moving forward on HFC phase-down proposals from Micronesia and from Canada, Mexico, and the United States. That’s up from 91 supporters last year and 41 two years ago. (The countries are listed below.)
The bad news: India, China, and Brazil still stand in the way.

http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/ddoniger/1xx_countries_support_hfc_curb.html
39 kilotons per year in an atomosphere of 5. x 10^13 Ktons equals what percent?

markx
August 20, 2014 6:00 pm

You’d reckon they could have made an exception for asthma inhalers:
http://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2009/03/why-does-my-new-asthma-inhaler-suck.html

the new inhalers, which use hydrofluoroalkane (HFA) as a propellant, have been attracting a litany of patient complaints, including that the medicine tastes funny, the propellant isn’t as strong, it’s less effective, and it costs much more.

lee
August 20, 2014 6:06 pm

Dave says:
August 20, 2014 at 5:44 pm
It was used as a cleaning agent in parts washers and also applied by brush, in the Australian Military.

u.k.(us)
August 20, 2014 6:09 pm

“People believe the emissions of ozone-depleting substances have stopped because of the Montreal Protocol,”
============
Define “people”.

Latitude
August 20, 2014 6:10 pm

from an unknown source…
ok, who’s chlorinating methane?

Goldie
August 20, 2014 6:19 pm

Okay, contaminated sites – yes, Landfills – yes, old stashes still being use – probably.
When I looked at a substance supposedly banned by Europe back in the 90s at the behest of the UK DoE, I could account for the UK’s contribution, but we were the only ones to report, everybody else claimed it was too difficult and therefore unknown.
My guess would be that everybody’s fudging the numbers!

1 2 3