Ozone hole worse than in recent years – due to colder than normal stratosphere in Antarctica

A couple of days ago we ran a piece at WUWT: Did We Really Save the Ozone Layer? In light of this press release, the question is worth pondering again.

From the NASA/GODDARD SPACE FLIGHT CENTER

Annual Antarctic ozone hole larger and formed later in 2015

This false-color image shows ozone concentrations above Antarctica on Oct. 2, 2015. Credits: NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center
This false-color image shows ozone concentrations above Antarctica on Oct. 2, 2015. Credits: NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center

The 2015 Antarctic ozone hole area was larger and formed later than in recent years, said scientists from NASA and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).

On Oct. 2, 2015, the ozone hole expanded to its peak of 28.2 million square kilometers (10.9 million square miles), an area larger than the continent of North America. Throughout October, the hole remained large and set many area daily records. Unusually cold temperature and weak dynamics in the Antarctic stratosphere this year resulted in this larger ozone hole. In comparison, last year the ozone hole peaked at 24.1 million square kilometers (9.3 million square miles) on Sept. 11, 2014. Compared to the 1991-2014 period, the 2015 ozone hole average area was the fourth largest.

“While the current ozone hole is larger than in recent years, the area occupied by this year’s hole is consistent with our understanding of ozone depletion chemistry and consistent with colder than average weather conditions in Earth’s stratosphere, which help drive ozone depletion,” said Paul A. Newman, chief scientist for Earth Sciences at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland.

The ozone hole is a severe depletion of the ozone layer above Antarctica that was first detected in the 1980s. The Antarctic ozone hole forms and expands during the Southern Hemisphere spring (August and September) because of the high levels of chemically active forms of chlorine and bromine in the stratosphere. These chlorine- and bromine-containing molecules are largely derived from man-made chemicals that steadily increased in Earth’s atmosphere up through the early 1990s.

“This year, our balloon-borne instruments measured nearly 100 percent ozone depletion in the layer above South Pole Station, Antarctica, that was 14 to 19 kilometers (9 to 12 miles) above Earth’s surface,” said Bryan Johnson, a researcher at NOAA’s Earth System Research Laboratory in Boulder, Colorado. “During September we typically see a rapid ozone decline, ending with about 95 percent depletion in that layer by October 1. This year the depletion held on an extra two weeks resulting in nearly 100 percent depletion by October 15.”

The ozone layer helps shield Earth from potentially harmful ultraviolet radiation that can cause skin cancer, cataracts, and suppress immune systems, as well as damage plants. The large size of this year’s ozone hole will likely result in increases of harmful ultraviolet rays at Earth’s surface, particularly in Antarctica and the Southern Hemisphere in the coming months.

Ozone depletion is primarily caused by man-made compounds that release chlorine and bromine gases in the stratosphere. Beginning in 1987, the internationally agreed-upon Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer has regulated these ozone-depleting compounds, such as chlorine-containing chlorofluorocarbons used in refrigerants and bromine-containing halon gases used as fire suppressants. Because of the Protocol, atmospheric levels of these ozone depleting compounds are slowly declining. The ozone hole is expected to recover back to 1980 levels in approximately 2070.

This year, scientists recorded the minimum thickness of the ozone layer at 101 Dobson units on October 4, 2015, as compared to 250-350 Dobson units during the 1960s, before the Antarctic ozone hole occurred. Dobson units are a measure of the overhead amount of atmospheric ozone.

The satellite ozone data come from the Dutch-Finnish Ozone Monitoring Instrument on NASA’s Aura satellite, launched in 2004, and the Ozone Monitoring and Profiler Suite instrument on the NASA-NOAA Suomi National Polar-orbiting Partnership satellite, launched in 2011. NOAA scientists at the South Pole station monitor the ozone layer above that location by using a Dobson spectrophotometer and regular ozone-sonde balloon launches that record the thickness of the ozone layer and its vertical distribution. Chlorine amounts are estimated using NOAA and NASA ground measurements and observations from the Microwave Limb Sounder aboard NASA’s Aura satellite. These satellites continue a data record dating back to the early 1970s.

###

Get notified when a new post is published.
Subscribe today!
0 0 votes
Article Rating
179 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Reply to  hunter
November 3, 2015 6:47 am

No, the measurements were started in the 50s but the hole didn’t develop until the late 70s.

Curious George
October 29, 2015 8:06 pm

Ozone hole worse than in recent years – due to due to colder than normal stratosphere in Antarctica. Are we 97% sure? Maybe we don’t really understand this phenomenon, just like many other.

October 29, 2015 8:32 pm

How it is possible to make a whole in a mass of gas? If you are talking ‘thinning’,
then it is annual cycle of fluctuation of O3 formation. More ozone is formed during summer
in the Northern Hemisphere and thinner during Winter. Ozone formation depends upon time
and season, depending upon which part of the earth the sun is shining.
Details
search by TITLE for details and sharing:
Solutions to Climate Change and Power crisis TURBINES DON’T DECREASE POWER OF RUNNING WATER

Dahlquist
October 29, 2015 8:43 pm

Dahlquist October 29, 2015 at 8:18 pm
Speaking of holes, did anyone watch the Republican debate last night, moderated by CNBC…One of them being Ms. Becky Quick? She has this patented bitchy, sultry attitude and appearance, punctuated by her practiced, low, growly, sexxxy voice. I was wondering if anyone else imagined if her real self would emerge if a sneaky, slippery, unexpected index finger poked her in her butt while she was putting on her show?
Reply

KLohrn
Reply to  Dahlquist
October 29, 2015 10:00 pm

lol, is that her real name, Becky Quick? That’s gotta be an under the table stage name…

Stephen Richards
Reply to  Dahlquist
October 30, 2015 2:19 am

Becky Quick is her name. She is a very modest woman and well read in financial matters. She doesn’t have a very formal education background but is IMO a formidable interviewer. Sadly, television never allows people to express themselves as they may wish because It doesn’t always make ‘good television’.

Dahlquist
Reply to  Stephen Richards
October 30, 2015 4:18 am

Stephen Richards…
I have only seen her once on TV and my opinion of her and her fellow, biased, liberal moderators, was that her and her fellows, conducting their MSM moderating of the debate last night, was a perfect example and view into the minds and hearts of so many of her peers in the media and which exposed the blatant bias in which most of the liberal, socialist media conduct themselves these days. They do not act in a professional manner as reporters and interviewers for the audience they serve, and allow themselves, wholeheartedly, to act as “warriors” for their personal beliefs, without regard for the ideals of the basic responsibilities of the “Freedom of the Press” as was intended in the U.S. Constitution.
My heart and soul actually rejoiced during last nights debate upon witnessing the outstanding response and opposition to the biased questioning by the CNBC moderators and the way the Candidates
on stage united together in support of one another in opposition to the bullsh*t that the biased and rude “moderators” were behaving in their “job”. “Job? Who can call that a job? It was a political fiasco, and deserves an award for one of the biggest piece of crap media events ever. Thanks CNBC and the idiot “moderators” you enlisted as hit men for your political agenda rather than for the citizens you supposedly serve as broadcasters or as “News” reporters.
Thank you.
Dahlquist

Reply to  Stephen Richards
November 1, 2015 10:01 am

Doesn’t a university degree in Political Science count as a formal education?

October 29, 2015 8:47 pm

When you go outside in Antarctica be sure to wear sunscreen.

Reply to  Slywolfe
October 30, 2015 2:36 am

How often is the sun overhead down there? 😉

Walter Sobchak
October 29, 2015 8:48 pm

“These chlorine- and bromine-containing molecules are largely derived from man-made chemicals that steadily increased in Earth’s atmosphere up through the early 1990s.”
There is an infinite amount of chlorine available to the atmosphere at sea level. You can smell it. How’s come it wasn’t until man-made compounds using chlorine were invented that any of it made it into the stratosphere. Think about what a hurricane does. It has to move a lot of chlorine along with everything else.
I say it’s sassafras.

Reply to  Walter Sobchak
October 29, 2015 9:46 pm

Most natural chlorine entering the atmosphere is in form of chloride ions which are non-destructive to ozone and usually quickly removed by water condensation/precipitation, or hydrogen chloride which is extremely hygroscopic and quickly removed by water condensation/precipitation. Keep in mind that air going from the surface to the tropopause has an extremely high rate of encountering cloud formation.

Reply to  Donald L. Klipstein
October 29, 2015 10:25 pm

Donald: Most but not all. This was discussed in this blog in the past though I haven’t gone searching for it.
However, the presence of natural Chlorine high in the atmosphere has been known since at least 1997.
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2004JD004797/full
http://phys.org/news/2014-01-high-molecular-chlorine-arctic-atmosphere.html
And then there is this (second smallest hole in 20 years – 2012 also covered by WUWT):
http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2012/20121024_antarcticozonehole.html
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2008/10/25/new-theory-predicts-the-largest-ozone-hole-over-antarctica-will-occur-this-month/

Crispin in Waterloo but really in Brussels
Reply to  Walter Sobchak
November 2, 2015 1:10 am

Walter, right on the mark. The Bromine is natural too. The ocean has scads of it. It is perfectly natural for Cl and Br to be in the air, just like H2S which is also from the sea.
Why is it so scary that there are chemicals in the air? Natural paths should be checked first. Even the dioxins are mostly from forest fires.

Reply to  Walter Sobchak
November 3, 2015 6:45 am

Because most of the Cl that is generated at the surface is washed out and returns to the surface. CFCs are inert in the lower atmosphere and insoluble in water so are able to be transported to the stratosphere where the UV light can destroy them (particularly in the presence of PSCs)

601nan
October 29, 2015 8:53 pm

The End Is Nigh …
Ha ha
Just a few years ago the WMO/UN/IPCC/NASA were trumping the Success of the Montreal Protocol in closing the “Ozone Hole.”
What You Say … Not Closed … Expanding!?
Deary Deary … Quite Contrary … those Montreal OzoneHoleCosmoNaughts need to reconsider their numbers and quickly!
Ha ha
What rubbish.
http://cen.acs.org/articles/93/i22/Montreal-Protocol-Healing-Earths-Ozone.html
Ha ha

Reply to  601nan
November 2, 2015 1:57 am

If I am reading http://cdiac.ornl.gov/oceans/new_atmCFC.html correctly, CFC12 concentrations have only declined 4% from their peak in about 2001. Assuming that CFCs _were_ causing problems and that the Montreal protocol _was_ the right thing to do (and I am too ignorant to deny either proposition), it’s way too early to see good results yet. It also means that it’s way too early to conclude that banning CFCs wasn’t a good idea.
Does anyone here understand how CFC concentrations way up high are measured?

KLohrn
October 29, 2015 9:37 pm

Practically all evidence I see around this world anymore leads to its electromagnetic and most polar nature.
Gets my negative and positive poles charged up.

Marcus
Reply to  KLohrn
October 30, 2015 7:45 am

Truly SHOCKING !!

The Great Walrus
October 29, 2015 9:43 pm

New system of units for modern scientists:
The fed (F) is a measure of vote-generating irrational alarmism.
The gore (G) is a measure of income-generating irrational alarmism.
The mann (m1) is a measure of trend creation.
The mod (m2) is the model-predicted increase in temperature/sealevel/CO2/baldness/migrants/VD/death.
D = the number of days left to Thermageddon.
The equation that links of all of these variables together is much like Newton’s law of universal gravitation: F = (G*m1*m2)/D

H.R.
Reply to  The Great Walrus
October 30, 2015 2:35 am

“F = (G*m1*m2)/D”
Good one, Mr. Walrus.

Marcus
Reply to  The Great Walrus
October 30, 2015 7:49 am

. . .ROTFLMAO

4TimesAYear
October 29, 2015 11:41 pm

And we know what’s “normal” for the ozone layer/hole because we’ve been monitoring it for only how long?

prjindigo
October 30, 2015 12:02 am

http://www-spof.gsfc.nasa.gov/Education/FAQs2.html#q23
Answer to Question #23: No sunlight, no Ozone creation.

Richard111
Reply to  prjindigo
October 30, 2015 12:27 am

About time this point came up. Sunlight creates ozone. Ozone has a half life of 30 minutes. No sunlight for six months and limited air movement will create a nice hole in the ozone layer, No help needed from messy man.

ren
Reply to  Richard111
October 30, 2015 1:10 am

“Why should multimerization cause high wind speeds?
Well, as we mentioned earlier, when multimers form they take up less space than regular air molecules, i.e., the molar density decreases.
So, if multimers rapidly form in one part of the atmosphere, the average molar density will rapidly decrease. This would reduce the air pressure. In effect, it would form a partial “vacuum”. This would cause the surrounding air to rush in to bring the air pressure back to normal. In other words, it would generate an inward wind.
Similarly, if multimers rapidly break down, the average molar density will rapidly increase, causing the air to rush out to the sides. That is, it would generate an outward wind.
We suggest that the jet streams form in regions where the amount of multimerization is rapidly increasing or decreasing.”
http://globalwarmingsolved.com/2013/11/summary-the-physics-of-the-earths-atmosphere-papers-1-3/

Stephen Richards
Reply to  Richard111
October 30, 2015 2:20 am

Sunlight creates ozone. and destroys it.

Reply to  Richard111
November 3, 2015 6:42 am

Ozone is also destroyed by UV, in the absence of UV in the winter over the poles ozone is not destroyed, it stays at about its maximum until the UV returns.
http://ozonewatch.gsfc.nasa.gov/statistics/meteorology_ytd_sh.png

Reply to  Richard111
November 3, 2015 6:51 pm

Lower stratosphere halflives of Ozone are more like 30 days.

ren
October 30, 2015 1:16 am

This year, the temperature in the stratosphere was very low. Strong polar vortex. The solar wind strong in the first half of the year.
http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/stratosphere/strat-trop/gif_files/time_pres_TEMP_ANOM_ALL_SH_2015.png

October 30, 2015 1:50 am

Could they not make up their minds? I was told global warming was a dead certainty. I was told it would warm at the poles first. Now it is way colder than “normal” at the South Pole?
The alarmists and logic are total strangers.

urederra
October 30, 2015 4:14 am

Unusually cold temperature and weak dynamics in the Antarctic stratosphere this year resulted in this larger ozone hole.

Since colder temperatures slow chemical reactions, see Chemical kinetics here , then this year unusually cold temperatures should have slowed down the ozone deplecting reactions allegedly produced by CFCs. The opposite happened. Therefore, it is not the CFCs.
It is the polar vortex.
As a bonus, this year unusually cold temperatures in the Antarctic stratosphere also rules out global warming. right? After all, global warming predicts higher temperatures in every place where CO2 concentrations rise, which is everywhere.

ren
Reply to  urederra
October 30, 2015 6:23 am

It is not explained action of the electrons of solar and galactic radiation on ozone.

Reply to  urederra
November 3, 2015 6:55 am

Simplistic knowledge and in this case wrong. Perhaps you have also heard of catalysis, which can greatly increase the rate of reactions. In the case of the destruction of O3 in the Antarctic stratosphere it occurs because there it is cold enough to form Polar Stratospheric Clouds, on the surface of which heterogeneous catalytic reactions take place producing Cl2 from the products of CFC photolysis. When the sun returns to the antarctic this Cl2 breaks down into Cl radicals which catalytically destroy the O3.
A little knowledge is a dangerous thing urederra!

Resourceguy
October 30, 2015 8:27 am

You mean I paid big money for higher pressure HVAC equipment and effectively mandatory maintenance insurance on that equipment for this?

kenin
October 30, 2015 9:30 am

Propaganda? I think so.
Its related to the amount of incoming solar energy and temp no?, I believe it has nothing to do with cfc’s at all. Aren’t most of the cfc’s produced in the northern hemisphere?? So how is it that this problem is constantly being talked about with the south pole??
Believing the cfc bull is no different than believing in the CO2 bull. Its just another excuse to try and control mans behaviour- that’s all! They can do away with the cfc’s I don’t care, but don’t use this global elitist agenda to scare everyone in the hopes you can control every aspect of their life. That’s what it boils down too- control and screwing with your mind.
Ask your self: who’s really benefiting from this???
I think I know who; it must have something to do with white Europeans and their corporate democracies along with the legal trade and their minions doing the dirty on the ever increasing ignorant people that walk this beautiful earth who will swallow almost anything.
peace

ren
October 30, 2015 11:08 am

Current distribution of ozone in the northern hemisphere indicates a lock the polar vortex and the center of the polar vortex between Greenland and Scandinavia.
http://oi68.tinypic.com/k53cia.jpg

ren
Reply to  ren
October 30, 2015 12:11 pm

Compare the magnetic field over the Atlantic Ocean and the Bering Strait.
http://www.geomag.bgs.ac.uk/images/charts/jpg/polar_n_z.jpg

Curious George
October 30, 2015 11:24 am

Climate scaremongering at its best. CFC (a culprit by consensus) concentrations down, an ozone hole size up. It must be a low temperature, stupid! (And more missing heat hiding in the oceans).

Tom Judd
October 30, 2015 11:59 am

For some reason the ‘ozone hole’ reminds me of the ‘hole theory of full employment.’
For those unfamiliar, the HTOFE goes like this: You take 1/2 of all the unemployed workers and employ them to dig holes in the ground. Since you now have all sorts of useless, bothersome, and potentially dangerous holes all over the place in the ground you need to fill them back up. So, you take the other 1/2 of unemployed workers and employ them to fill all those holes back up. Voila; full employment!
Catch the similarity? Blame human activity [in the production of certain products (and, thus the employment of workers to make these products)] for the ozone hole. Then employ other workers to produce substitute products so the ozone hole fills back up.
See the similarity? But there’s an additional similarity in that both theories, far from employing people, actually succeed instead in unemploying people. However, in both cases there are a few who, indeed, benefit.

fmassen
October 30, 2015 12:09 pm

Speaking of the ozone hole, one usually forgets how important are the yearly swings in the mid-latitudes of the NH. Look here for the plot of DU readings at Uccle (Brussels, Belgium): the sine-curve represents the average since 1979. The early mean values are not decreasing (see here ), so in our latitudes no need to worry. The influence of thinning of the O3 layer on ground UVB irradiance is nicely shown in this paper .

Zeke
October 30, 2015 2:21 pm

The EPA’s attack on bromine-containing molecules is an attack on conventional agriculture. Peach orchards, strawberry growers and more will be deeply affected. It has been used as a safe, proven, inexpensive fumigant and for controlling pests for decades.
The virulent, agressive organic-only activists are removing these essential chemical controls under the guise of saving the ozone. “The EPA claims using this chemical threatens the earth’s ozone layer and that the U.S. had to discontinue its use because of the Montreal Protocol On Substances That Deplete the Ozone Layer and because of the Clean Air Act.” Hippy horse manure on display in its most toxic form. They will never stop. Ever. Not until the majority of your food gets eaten by nematodes, rusts, smuts, mildews, blights and insects before you ever see it.
And what about the thousands of natural sources of bromine?
Bromine in sea water?
Bromine as an essential nutrient in the human diet?
Those are more questions to answer about Bromine and yet the rules are being imposed already on growers.

Zeke
October 30, 2015 2:23 pm

Methyl bromides occur in nature:
“Bromomethane originates from both natural and human sources. In the ocean, marine organisms are estimated to produce 1-2 billion kilograms annually.[2] It is also produced in small quantities by certain terrestrial plants, such as members of the Brassicaceae family. It is manufactured for agricultural and industrial use by reacting methanol with hydrogen bromide:
CH3OH + HBr → CH3Br + H2O”