Ooops. Despite Montreal Protocol, ozone-destroying CFC's on the rise

NOAA finds rising emissions of ozone-destroying chemical banned by Montreal Protocol

Emissions of one of the chemicals most responsible for the Antarctic ozone hole are on the rise, despite an international treaty that required an end to its production in 2010, a new NOAA study shows.

Trichlorofluoromethane, or CFC-11, is the second-most abundant ozone-depleting gas in the atmosphere and a member of the family of chemicals most responsible for the giant hole in the ozone layer that forms over Antarctica each September. Once widely used as a foaming agent, production of CFC-11 was phased out by the Montreal Protocol in 2010.

The new study, published today in Nature, documents an unexpected increase in emissions of this gas, likely from new, unreported production.

“We’re raising a flag to the global community to say, ‘This is what’s going on, and it is taking us away from timely recovery from ozone depletion,'” said NOAA scientist Stephen Montzka, lead author of the paper, which has co-authors from CIRES, the UK, and the Netherlands. “Further work is needed to figure out exactly why emissions of CFC-11 are increasing and if something can be done about it soon.”

CFCs were once widely used in the manufacture of aerosol sprays, as blowing agents for foams and packing materials, as solvents, and as refrigerants. Though production of CFCs was phased out by the Montreal Protocol, a large reservoir of CFC-11 exists today primarily contained in foam insulation in buildings, and appliances manufactured before the mid-1990s. A smaller amount of CFC-11 also exists today in chillers.

Because CFC-11 still accounts for one-quarter of all chlorine present in today’s stratosphere, expectations for the ozone hole to heal by mid-century depend on an accelerating decline of CFC-11 in the atmosphere as its emissions diminish– which should happen with no new CFC-11 production.

Global CFC-11 emission, reported production and implied release rate from CFC-11 banks.

Despite the increase in CFC-11 emissions, its concentration in the atmosphere continues to decrease, but only about half as fast as the decline observed a few years ago, and at a substantially slower rate than expected. This means that the total concentration of ozone-depleting chemicals, overall, is still decreasing in the atmosphere. However, that decrease is significantly slower than it would be without the new CFC emissions.

Precise measurements of global atmospheric concentrations of CFC-11 made by NOAA and CIRES scientists at 12 remote sites around the globe show that CFC-11 concentrations declined at an accelerating rate prior to 2002 as expected. Then, surprisingly, the rate of decline hardly changed over the decade that followed. Even more unexpected was that the rate of decline slowed by 50 percent after 2012. After considering a number of possible causes, Montzka and his colleagues concluded that CFC emissions must have increased after 2012. This conclusion was confirmed by other changes recorded in NOAA’s measurements during the same period, such as a widening difference between CFC-11 concentrations in the northern and southern hemispheres – evidence that the new source was somewhere north of the equator.

Measurements from Hawaii indicate the sources of the increasing emissions are likely in eastern Asia. More work will be needed to narrow down the locations of these new emissions, Montzka said.

Hemispheric differences in CFC-11 mole fractions represented by results from individual sites at comparable latitudes.

The Montreal Protocol has been effective in reducing ozone-depleting gases in the atmosphere because all countries in the world agreed to legally binding controls on the production of most human-produced gases known to destroy ozone. Under the treaty’s requirements, nations have reported less than 500 tons of new CFC-11 production per year since 2010. CFC-11 concentrations have declined by 15 percent from peak levels measured in 1993 as a result.

That has led scientists to predict that by mid- to late-century, the abundance of ozone-depleting gases would to fall to levels last seen before the Antarctic ozone hole began to appear in the early 1980s.

However, results from the new analysis of NOAA atmospheric measurements show that from 2014 to 2016, emissions of CFC-11 increased by more than 14,000 tons per year to about 65,000 tons per year, or 25 percent above average emissions during 2002 to 2012.

To put that in perspective, production of CFC-11, marketed under the trade name Freon, peaked at about 430,000 tons per year in the 1980s. Emissions of this CFC to the atmosphere reached about 386,000 tons per year at their peak later in the decade.

These findings represent the first time emissions of one of the three most abundant, long-lived CFCs have increased for a sustained period since production controls took effect in the late 1980s.

If the source of these emissions can be identified and mitigated soon, the damage to the ozone layer should be minor. If not remedied soon, however, substantial delays in ozone layer recovery could be expected, Montzka said.

David Fahey, director of NOAA”s Chemical Science Division and co-chair of the United Nations Environment Programme’s Ozone Secretariat ‘s Science Advisory Panel, said ongoing monitoring of the atmosphere will be key to ensuring that the goal of restoring the ozone layer is achieved.

“The analysis of these extremely precise and accurate atmospheric measurements is an excellent example of the vigilance needed to ensure continued compliance with provisions of the Montreal Protocol and protection of the Earth’s ozone layer,” Fahey said.

###

The paper: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-018-0106-2

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

138 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
littlepeaks
May 17, 2018 12:39 pm

Maybe “scientists” can find one or more additional useful chemicals to ban.

paqyfelyc
Reply to  littlepeaks
May 20, 2018 4:56 am

underway. All of them chemicals.

Quinn
May 17, 2018 2:00 pm

“family of chemicals most responsible for the giant hole in the ozone layer that forms over Antarctica each September”
I thought the jury was still out on this. Do we in fact know that there was no seasonal ozone hole 50 or 100 years ago? When global ozone concentration mapping started, was there no seasonal ozone hole, then it appeared and got bigger year by year?
Just asking.

Art
Reply to  Quinn
May 17, 2018 2:28 pm

We know it was there in 1956 and was explained as a natural occurrence a couple years later. See my comment a few posts above.
Way back when the panic over the discovery of the hole by NASA was in the news, I read that one of their scientist figured it couldn’t have just suddenly formed because of those chemicals, it would have gradually built up over the years as the concentration increased, so he looked into NASA’s satellite photo archives and saw it was there all along, ever since 1972 when they first started. Seems they had previously dismissed it as a refraction caused by the curvature of the atmosphere.
But don’t let scientific fact get in the way of a good doomsday scenario.

Reply to  Quinn
May 21, 2018 4:17 am

Quinn May 17, 2018 at 2:00 pm
“family of chemicals most responsible for the giant hole in the ozone layer that forms over Antarctica each September”
I thought the jury was still out on this. Do we in fact know that there was no seasonal ozone hole 50 or 100 years ago?

We know that there was no ‘hole’ from 1957 when measurements began until about 20 years later.
When global ozone concentration mapping started, was there no seasonal ozone hole, then it appeared and got bigger year by year?
Yes, that’s right.

Patrick MJD
May 17, 2018 4:40 pm

“That has led scientists to predict that by mid- to late-century, the abundance of ozone-depleting gases would to fall to levels last seen before the Antarctic ozone hole began to appear in the early 1980s.”
It didn’t begin to appear in the early 80’s, it was always there and always has been. It was detected in the early 80’s.
Alarmist drivel!

Art
Reply to  Patrick MJD
May 18, 2018 11:11 am

Actually it was first detected in 1956.

Reply to  Patrick MJD
May 20, 2018 6:44 am

Patrick MJD May 17, 2018 at 4:40 pm
“That has led scientists to predict that by mid- to late-century, the abundance of ozone-depleting gases would to fall to levels last seen before the Antarctic ozone hole began to appear in the early 1980s.”
It didn’t begin to appear in the early 80’s, it was always there and always has been. It was detected in the early 80’s.
Alarmist drivel!

No it’s the truth, see the results from the British Antarctic Survey since 1957:
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/05/17/ooops-despite-montreal-protocol-ozone-destroying-cfcs-on-the-rise/comment-page-1/#comment-2821111

Edwin
May 18, 2018 8:23 am

Once upon a time I asked my research staff the question, “How did we know there was not a hole in the ozone over the Antarctic in the centuries prior to 1980 since most of the evidence that there is one is derived from satellite data?”
The first thing a Indian villager buys when his village gets electricity is a refrigerator. So gee I wonder who might be producing the illicit CFCs today.

Reply to  Edwin
May 20, 2018 6:49 am

Edwin May 18, 2018 at 8:23 am
Once upon a time I asked my research staff the question, “How did we know there was not a hole in the ozone over the Antarctic in the centuries prior to 1980 since most of the evidence that there is one is derived from satellite data?”

Hopefully one of them replied that ‘We know because the British Antarctic Survey results since 1957 show the development of the ‘Hole’ around 1978′.

Edwin
Reply to  Phil.
May 20, 2018 11:37 am

Phil, you missed the point. The first expedition to actually land in the Antarctica was around the turn of the 20th and they were not looking up. The 1957 exploration was part of IGY which was the first real modern scientific exploration of Antartica. Before that it was primarily whaling ships in the area. Whether or not there was a hole prior to humans actually landing during the IGY years is unknowable. I know of no proxy for the lack or present of a ozone hole in the ice cores.

May 20, 2018 7:43 pm

A critical review of the ozone chemistry assumptions of the Montreal Protocol
https://chaamjamal.wordpress.com/2018/04/01/ozone-depletion-and-ozone-holes/

Reply to  chaamjamal
May 20, 2018 8:35 pm

Really, how can that be the case when you don’t mention PSCs?