Scientists: Arctic Ozone Depletion ‘unprecedented’
By: Stephanie Nebehay
An article from World Environment on NBC.com
April 4th, 2011
Summary
An article from World Environment on NBC.com
April 4th, 2011
Summary
The article I read is all about how the ozone layer has had a record loss this past winter. In fact, the United Nations agency said that from the beginning of the winter to late March, the ozone column lost 40 percent of its mass. That’s a lot, and was an amount unheard of until now.
In previous years, the highest mass ever lost was 30 percent. This occurred during several seasons for 15 years, so for the ozone layer to lose 40 percent in one winter, that’s just unbelievably terrible.
In previous years, the highest mass ever lost was 30 percent. This occurred during several seasons for 15 years, so for the ozone layer to lose 40 percent in one winter, that’s just unbelievably terrible.
The area where the ozone layer is depleted can move. And if it moves toward lower latitudes, ultraviolet (UV) radiation will be higher than normal in the upcoming seasons for those areas. So a depleted ozone layer doesn’t just affect one spot, it affects a large, widespread area. A spokesperson from the World Meteorological Organization advised people to check UV forecasts for their areas, because less of the ozone layer means less protection from the sun’s harmful rays.
If the depleted ozone layer is to move away from the Arctic towards lower latitudes, it would affect some of Russia, Canada, Nordic countries, and even Alaska in the US. However, a UV radiation increase in those parts of the world would be less intense than if the increase was to take place in the tropics.
Not only people are affected by UV rays (which contribute to immune system damage, skin cancer, and cataracts in humans). Marine life and crops can also suffer from harmful effects.
Over Antarctica, large ozone loss is not uncommon. In fact, it occurs every year. This is extremely different from the Arctic stratosphere, because conditions there vary each year.
The Montreal Protocol was an international agreement to cut production and consumption of halons, chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), and other ozone-destroying chemicals. It was thought to be very successful (The 1987 pact eliminated substances like CFCs and halons that used to be used in fire extinguishers, spray cans, and refrigerators), but for some reason the drastic ozone mass loss still occurred.
Over Antarctica, large ozone loss is not uncommon. In fact, it occurs every year. This is extremely different from the Arctic stratosphere, because conditions there vary each year.
The Montreal Protocol was an international agreement to cut production and consumption of halons, chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), and other ozone-destroying chemicals. It was thought to be very successful (The 1987 pact eliminated substances like CFCs and halons that used to be used in fire extinguishers, spray cans, and refrigerators), but for some reason the drastic ozone mass loss still occurred.
Any way you look at it, the recent ozone mass loss was extremely drastic and is going to have adverse effects on humans, marine life, and crops alike.
Opinion/Reflection
I personally think that the ozone loss is extremely terrible. It’s almost unbelievable that 40 percent of the ozone layer’s mass could be lost in one winter when previously the highest amount heard of was a 30 percent loss. That just shows how bad people are. We need to stop using ozone-depleting substances.
I feel that until the UV rays start increasing in many areas of lower latitude around the world, people won’t realize what they’ve done. Sure, people will see news stories (like this one) and hear scientists talk about the damage, but they won’t understand the full impact until they see some changes. It’s sad, though, because UV rays cause cataracts, skin cancer, and immune system damage, so by the time people truly realize what they’ve done, it will be too late. People will have to learn the hard way, unfortunately.
I believe it is extremely unfair for marine life to have to suffer on our behalf. They’re not doing anything to harm the ozone layer, they’re not using ozone-depleting substances, so why should they be affected? The thing is they shouldn’t. But humans and animals are all on the same earth, so anything that one species does will affect the other. It’s extremely sad, and I feel really bad for the animals who have to suffer despite the fact that they aren’t doing anything wrong.
I also feel bad for people who don’t pollute atmosphere. If people don’t want the ozone layer to keep losing its mass, then everyone has to work together to try and stop it. This doesn’t just mean the people in America, though. People from all over the world have to pitch in and stop using ozone-depleting substances, or the damage that we have caused will continue to get worse.
I believe it is extremely unfair for marine life to have to suffer on our behalf. They’re not doing anything to harm the ozone layer, they’re not using ozone-depleting substances, so why should they be affected? The thing is they shouldn’t. But humans and animals are all on the same earth, so anything that one species does will affect the other. It’s extremely sad, and I feel really bad for the animals who have to suffer despite the fact that they aren’t doing anything wrong.
I also feel bad for people who don’t pollute atmosphere. If people don’t want the ozone layer to keep losing its mass, then everyone has to work together to try and stop it. This doesn’t just mean the people in America, though. People from all over the world have to pitch in and stop using ozone-depleting substances, or the damage that we have caused will continue to get worse.
Finally, I thought that the Montreal Protocol was a very good idea, and it’s sad that more people don’t abide by its rules. After all, the agreement was made for the well being of humans and the only people we’re hurting by not following is ourselves. And that’s just sad.
This article relates to class because we started learning about the atmosphere and one of the important parts of the atmosphere is the ozone layer. It helps protect people from the sun’s harmful rays, and without it, I don’t know if humans or other forms of life would be around.
This article relates to class because we started learning about the atmosphere and one of the important parts of the atmosphere is the ozone layer. It helps protect people from the sun’s harmful rays, and without it, I don’t know if humans or other forms of life would be around.
Ask Questions
1. What other effects can UV rays have on humans?
2. Name some ways in which marine life and crops will have to suffer because of the ozone layer depletion.
3. Why do you think people keep using ozone-depleting substances, even though they make the ozone layer lose mass?
4. Do you think people will realize what they’re doing soon, or not until it’s too late? What do you consider that too late to be?
5. Why do you think that having ozone depletion over the tropics would be more intense than having ozone depletion elsewhere? (by intense I mean it makes people suffer more)
2. Name some ways in which marine life and crops will have to suffer because of the ozone layer depletion.
3. Why do you think people keep using ozone-depleting substances, even though they make the ozone layer lose mass?
4. Do you think people will realize what they’re doing soon, or not until it’s too late? What do you consider that too late to be?
5. Why do you think that having ozone depletion over the tropics would be more intense than having ozone depletion elsewhere? (by intense I mean it makes people suffer more)
I realize now that this question should say more intense, but I didn't want to change it and mess everyone's comments up.
6. How come the ozone lost so much mass recently, other than the obvious fact that people are continuing to use ozone-depleting substances?
Graphics
Left: This image shows the logo for the Montreal Protocol
Right: This picture shows the UV radiation that hits towns and people when the ozone layer is there compared to the amount of UV rays that hit towns and people when the ozone layer is gone.
Reflection
ReplyDeleteWell, considering the amount of crap we're putting into our atmosphere, I'm not surprised at all that we lost so much ozone. Personally, I think this might be a good thing. Perhaps this will motivate the bunch of clowns on Capital Hill to actually do something about climate change on a large scale (*cough* Kyoto Protocol *cough*)
Responses
1) Death. Oh yeah, and really bad sunburns.
2) Marine life will have a bit more of a buffer because water acts as a UV shield. Before Earth even had an ozone layer, life was abundant in the oceans. Then the ozone layer came around, animals and plants moved to land, and then we came along and messed up the ozone layer. How ironic.
But crops on the other hand will suffer. They'll mutate and become unusable, and that will cause famine in the area beneath the ozone hole.
3) Three reasons
a. The ozone-depleting stuff is probably cheap
b. Some people think climate change is a hoax (*cough* Tea Party *cough*)
c. People may not know that what they're using depletes the ozone layer.
4) I hope people will realize before we're all a bunch of walking french fries, but given the fact that 30% annual depletion of ozone mass over 15 years hasn't done squat, I doubt it.
5) First of all, you've got this question backwards. The effects, according to your own article, would be LESS over the tropics, and here's why:
a. The equator is already scorching hot and has naturally higher UV levels because it gets the most direct sunlight.
b. Because of that, the plants and animals there have a higher tolerance for extreme heat an UV radiation
c. Most of the equator lies over either
I. The ocean
II. Small uninhabited islands
III. The African, Indonesian, and Amazon rain forests, where the canopy would take the brunt of it and the people are dark-skinned and have more protection against melanoma.
6) Ozone is a triatomic molecule of oxygen formed during lightning strikes. A lot of the oxygen in the atmosphere is being bound with carbon to form carbon dioxide because of human activity. This means there's less pure oxygen gas to be bound into ozone. Thus, ozone-depleting chemicals aren't the only problem.
I'm a bit confused about this issue, honestly. You said that 40% of the ozone layer was depleted this year, a record high from the typical 30%. Is the ozone layer regenerated each year? Because otherwise, the amount of ozone getting depleted is actually going down, not up, because 30% of x is more than 40% of the remaining 70% of x, meaning the situation is improving.
ReplyDeleteAnd wouldn't we want the hole in the ozone layer to move down to more equatorial latitudes, where the increased heat and radiation will be less of a drastic change and there are fewer ice caps?
I'm not sure if I'm interpreting this correctly, but it looks like the ozone situation is improving, not worsening. Which is good, because the immune system damage, cataracts, and skin cancer sound sort of scary. I don't even know what cataracts are but the word is freaking me out a bit, especially if its as serious as skin cancer.
1) Death by sunburn? Or, unless I'm misinterpreting 'radiation', then radiation sickness, which also leads to death.
2) Increased heat and radiation. So pretty much what they already are now, but more exasperated. I'm not really sure anything new would happen, it would all just get worse. Of course, if we had no ozone, then all life would be wiped out, I think. Atmospheres are sort of important.
3) They are cheap. Or, giving them the benefit of doubt, they don't know better.
4) I think people as a whole will only really begin to realize once its Only Sort of Too Late. Like there aren't any more islands in the Pacific or something. Not the point of no return, but not a place where we can just hit the reset button and emerge like nothing ever happened.
5) I don't, thanks. The temperature and radiation variances would be less great, meaning that it wouldn't be so bad as for, say, the Finns. Also, there are very few ice caps in the tropics, which means there is no ice cap melt.
6) Again, the percentage lost increased, not necessarily the total mass lost. Unless it regenerates each year (Which would have been a great thing to mention, if so.), then the actual mass lost has decreased. Again, its simple algebra: 30% of x > 40% of 70% (which is what's left after the 30% is gone) of x.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteKate, I think the article meant that 40% was lost in one winter whereas it took 15 years to lose 30%, but I'm not entirely sure. That was just the way I interpreted the article.
ReplyDeleteLike Kate, I think its odd that the article doesn't say anything about regeneration. If ozone does regenerate, I think we can take a small (very small) sigh of relief. However, if it doesn't, we're doomed. I'm going to assume for now that it does regenerate, because if we were losing ozone this fast, we would have much more drastic effects on earth. Crazy stuff is happening in the weather, but not super crazy. By the way Kate, cataracts are something you get on your eyes. They can make you temporarily blind, but you can get them removed.
ReplyDelete1. Really bad sunburn. My cousin would be doomed (she's a ginger)
2. I'm just going to steal Eric's answer here because I really don't know. Marine life won't really be affected. Crops will mutate until they're unusable
3. Because people don't care
4. Probably not until it's too late. I would consider too late when they ozone layer is gone.
5. According to Eric, it would not be worse. However, if I had not read that, I would have said that the sun is stronger at the equator, and so are the UV rays. If you take away the ozone layer, then the equator would be directly affected by radiation.
6. Perhaps the affects of what happened a few years ago are just affecting the ozone layer now. So even though we're getting better, the ozone layer is getting worse, but because we're getting better, the ozone layer will eventually get better.